The Relevance of Applying the Rule of Reason in Analyzing Alleged Interest Rate Cartels in Fintech Lending under Article 5 of Law No. 5 of 1999
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24252/al-risalah.vi.66401Keywords:
AFPI, Efisiensi Ekonomi, Fintech Lending, Kartel, Rule of Reason.Abstract
The rapid growth of the financial technology (fintech) industry has spurred the emergence of alternative financing models through peer-to-peer (P2P) lending services in Indonesia. This innovation plays a crucial role in expanding access to financing and enhancing financial inclusion; however, it has also raised legal concerns, particularly regarding potential cartel practices in interest rate setting by operators affiliated with the Indonesian Joint Fintech Funding Association (AFPI). This study aims to analyze the relevance of applying the rule of reason approach in assessing alleged interest rate cartel practices in the fintech lending industry, as well as to evaluate to what extent this approach can reflect a balance between economic efficiency and the protection of business competition as stipulated in Article 5 of Law No. 5 of 1999. This study employs a normative legal methodology using legislative, case-based, and conceptual approaches. Previous research on competition compliance in the fintech sector has generally focused on the effectiveness of the KPPU’s compliance programs and the supervisory role of the OJK; however, it has not specifically examined interest rate standardization by industry associations within the framework of the rule of reason. In this context, the application of the rule of reason becomes crucial and context-specific, as the uniformity of interest rates facilitated by the AFPI under OJK supervision cannot automatically be classified as a violation of competition law if it is proven to enhance efficiency, reduce credit risk, and protect consumers. Thus, this study contributes a critical analysis of the relationship between fintech sectoral regulation, the role of industry associations, and the potential for price cartels from a competition law perspective, while reinforcing the urgency of integrating economic analysis into competition law enforcement in the digital sector.
References
Fuady, Munir. Hukum Antimonopoli Menyongsong Era Persaingan Sehat. PT Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung, 1999.
Lubis, Andi Fahmi, et al. Hukum Persaingan Usaha: Antara Teks dan Konteks. Jakarta: Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha dan Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ) GmbH, 2009.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Surabaya: Kencana, 2005.
Nurhaini, Elisabeth. Metode Penelitian Hukum. Bandung: PT Refika Aditama, 2018.
Sirait, Ningrum Natasya. Hukum Persaingan di Indonesia. Medan: Pustaka Abdi Bangsa Pers, 2011.
Syahrani, Riduan. Rangkuman Intisari Ilmu Hukum. PT Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung, 2011.
Usman, Rachmadi. Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia. Sinar Grafika, Jakarta, (2013).
Yani, Ahmad dan Gunawan Widjaja. Seri Hukum Bisnis: Anti Monopoli. Fajar Interpratama, Jakarta, (2002).
Adeffian, Choirul. “Metode Pendekatan Per Se Illegal dan Rule of Reason Terkait Penegakan Hukum Alternatif Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat.” Shar-E: Jurnal Kajian Ekonomi Hukum Syariah, Vol. 9, No. 2 (Juli 2023): 99.
Ariadin, dan Mirwan. “Efektivitas Landasan Hukum Ekonomi Digital Indonesia: Analisis Disharmoni Regulasi dalam Ekosistem Marketplace.” Iqtishaduna: Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Hukum Ekonomi Syariah, Vol. 6, No. 3 (April 2025): 869.
Andhini, Cheyzsa Mega S.P. “Problematika Hukum pada Peer to Peer Lending di Indonesia dalam Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha.” Jurist-Diction, Vol. 2, No. 6, 2019.
Annas, Muhammad dan Muhamad Anwar Ansori. “Problems in Determining Interest in Peer-to-Peer Lending in Indonesia.” Jurnal Media Hukum 28 (1), 2021.
Aryadiputra, Dimas, Deny Slamet Pribadi, dan Aryo Subroto. “Perbedaan Penerapan Pendekatan Per Se Illegal dan Rule of Reason dalam Putusan KPPU tentang Kartel Penetapan Harga.” Risalah Hukum, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Februari 2022): 10.
Darman. “Financial Technology (Fintech): Karakteristik dan Kualitas Pinjaman pada Peer to Peer Lending di Indonesia.” Jurnal Manajemen Teknologi, Vol. 18, No. 2 (Agustus 2019): 130.
Elhauge, Einer. “Harvard, Not Chicago: Which Antitrust School Drives Recent Supreme Court Decisions?” Harvard Law and Economics Discussion Paper, No. 594 (2007): 2–14.
Handayani, Otih, dan Adi Sulistiyono. “Pembadanan Hukum Fintech sebagai Instrumen Pengaturan Persaingan Usaha yang Sehat.” Masalah-Masalah Hukum, Vol. 49, No. 3 (2020): 244–255.
Hariz, Naufal. “Penerapan Rule of Reason dalam Putusan Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha pada Kasus Penguasaan Pasar.” Jurnal Suara Hukum, Vol. 5, No. 1 (Maret 2023): 132.
Hovenkamp, Herbert. “The Rule of Reason.” Florida Law Review, Vol. 70, No. 1 (2018): 81–166.
Judijanto, Loso, dkk. “Dampak Fintech Lending terhadap Industri Perbankan.” Jurnal Ekonomi dan Kewirausahaan West Science, Vol. 2, No. 3 (Juli 2024): 341.
Kongres, Evi, Fajar Sugianto, Erny Herlin Setyorini, Bariyima Sylvester Kokpan, dan Sheng Zhang. “Protecting Consumers Against Defamation Claims: The Role of Common Interest in Product Reviews.” Khazanah Hukum 6 (3), (2024), 294.
Marginingsih, Ratnawaty. “Financial Technology (Fintech) dalam Inklusi Keuangan Nasional di Masa Pandemi Covid-19.” Moneter: Jurnal Akuntansi dan Keuangan, Vol. 8, No. 1 (April 2021): 58.
Nugrahaeni, Dwi, dan Artina Wahyu. “Tantangan dan Pengaturan Price Discrimination: Studi Komparatif Indonesia dan Malaysia.” Jurnal Ilmiah Dunia Hukum, Vol. 3, No. 2 (2019): 68–86.
Nur, Aisyah Amini, Paramita Prananingtyas, dan Irawati. “Analisa Yuridis Penerapan Prinsip Rule of Reason oleh Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha (KPPU) dalam Kasus-Kasus Dugaan Kartel.” Diponegoro Law Journal, Vol. 12, No. 3 (2023): 10–13.
Pamungkas, Anom Gilang. “Penggunaan Pendekatan Rule of Reason pada Kasus Monopoli Izin Pelayanan Terminal Bongkar Muat Petikemas Tanjung Priok (Studi Kasus Putusan KPPU Nomor 04/KPPU-I/2003).” Das Sollen: Jurnal Kajian Kontemporer Hukum dan Masyarakat, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2023): 31.
Prasetyo, Wahyu Okta. “Analisis Yuridis Azas Itikad Baik Dalam Penetapan Suku Bunga Pada Perjanjian Financial Technology Peer-to-Peer Lending (Pinjaman Online) Dalam Perspektif Hukum Bisnis.” Jurnal Gema Wiralodra 14 (1). 2023.
Santika, Putu Ari. “Pengaruh Sistem Kartel Terhadap Stabilitas Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia”, Jurnal Preferensi Hukum 1 (2), (2020), 17.
Sari, Wahyu Retno Dwi. “Kartel: Upaya Damai untuk Meredam Konfrontasi Persaingan Usaha”, Jurnal KPPU 1, (2009), 191.
Sugianto, Fajar, Yuber Lago, dan Laurenzia Luna. “State Law, Integral Economic Justice, and Better Regulatory Practices: Promoting Economic Efficiency in Indonesia.” Global Legal Review 3 (2), (2023), 91.
Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK). Peraturan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Republik Indonesia Nomor 10/POJK.05/2022 tentang Layanan Pendanaan Bersama Berbasis Teknologi Informasi. Jakarta: Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, 2022.
Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK). Surat Edaran Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Republik Indonesia Nomor 19/SEOJK.06/2023 tentang Penyelenggaraan Layanan Pendanaan Bersama Berbasis Teknologi Informasi. Jakarta: Otoritas Jasa Keuangan, 2023.
Republik Indonesia. Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1999 Nomor 33.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Rupertus Arvinci Ngabut, Richard C. Adam
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
