The recent arrest of a Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition (Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha / KPPU) Commissioner suspected of corruption has proven to be the spur the KPPU needed to revisit issues of ethics and a code to govern the behavior of members. More importantly, an effective code of ethics will potentially restore some of the confidence of business lost as a result of the corruption allegations leveled at the KPPU and one of its members.
With this in mind the KPPU has confirmed KPPU Decision No. 22/KPPU/KEP/I/2009.Unfortunately, at a mere five chapters and twelve articles, the code of ethics appears to be a little bit on the “light” side for the battle against corruption and the drive for better institutional governance. It remains to be seen whether the old adage of “something being better than nothing” holds true.
The base values expected of KPPU members include:
-Devotion to God
-Honesty
-Fairness
-Courage and resoluteness
-Integrity
-Independence
-Professional
-Responsibility
In essence, these basic values are to be contained in everything that the member does in the performance of their duties as a KPPU member. In most respects this appears to be common sense rather than any new onerous imposition on the KPPU members. For example, KPPU members are to prioritize the interests of the state over any personal, group, or political interests. This is common sense and reflects the expectations of the community as a whole towards the KPPU. Nevertheless, the idea of prioritizing one interest over another is a strange use of language. Simply, the personal, group, or political interests of the KPPU member must never form part of their reasoning in reaching a judgment.
The Decision establishes an Honor Council. This Honor Council is to be ad hoc and will comprise of a Chairperson and four members. This will include three members of the KPPU and two members from outside the KPPU. The basic functions of the Honor Council are to examine complaints of breaches of the code of ethics and then make a decision as to whether the allegation of breach is proven or not.
The procedures for the examination of the complaint and any subsequent hearings are to be closed. This is sure to raise questions regarding the openness and integrity of the system, particularly where the process is not subject to public scrutiny. Nevertheless, any decision that the Honor Council reaches is to be read out at an open hearing. It is unclear whether this will include a full disclosure of the evidence or a cursory reference to the legal reasoning adopted by the Honor Council in reaching their decision.
Any additional regulations or clarifications to this Decision will be by KPPU Decisions.
This KPPU Decision repeals and replaces KPPU Decision No. 6/KPPU/Kep/XI/2000.
The Decision has been in force since 28 January 2009.
The recent arrest of a Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition (Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha / KPPU) Commissioner suspected of corruption has proven to be the spur the KPPU needed to revisit issues of ethics and a code to govern the behavior of members. More importantly, an effective code of ethics will potentially restore some of the confidence of business lost as a result of the corruption allegations leveled at the KPPU and one of its members.
With this in mind the KPPU has confirmed KPPU Decision No. 22/KPPU/KEP/I/2009.Unfortunately, at a mere five chapters and twelve articles, the code of ethics appears to be a little bit on the “light” side for the battle against corruption and the drive for better institutional governance. It remains to be seen whether the old adage of “something being better than nothing” holds true.
The base values expected of KPPU members include:
-Devotion to God
-Honesty
-Fairness
-Courage and resoluteness
-Integrity
-Independence
-Professional
-Responsibility
In essence, these basic values are to be contained in everything that the member does in the performance of their duties as a KPPU member. In most respects this appears to be common sense rather than any new onerous imposition on the KPPU members. For example, KPPU members are to prioritize the interests of the state over any personal, group, or political interests. This is common sense and reflects the expectations of the community as a whole towards the KPPU. Nevertheless, the idea of prioritizing one interest over another is a strange use of language. Simply, the personal, group, or political interests of the KPPU member must never form part of their reasoning in reaching a judgment.
The Decision establishes an Honor Council. This Honor Council is to be ad hoc and will comprise of a Chairperson and four members. This will include three members of the KPPU and two members from outside the KPPU. The basic functions of the Honor Council are to examine complaints of breaches of the code of ethics and then make a decision as to whether the allegation of breach is proven or not.
The procedures for the examination of the complaint and any subsequent hearings are to be closed. This is sure to raise questions regarding the openness and integrity of the system, particularly where the process is not subject to public scrutiny. Nevertheless, any decision that the Honor Council reaches is to be read out at an open hearing. It is unclear whether this will include a full disclosure of the evidence or a cursory reference to the legal reasoning adopted by the Honor Council in reaching their decision.
Any additional regulations or clarifications to this Decision will be by KPPU Decisions.
This KPPU Decision repeals and replaces KPPU Decision No. 6/KPPU/Kep/XI/2000.
The Decision has been in force since 28 January 2009.
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
Professional Solutions
University Solutions
Pro
My Workspace
Pro AI
Terfavorit
Allex QnA
Pro Compliance
