Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha terhadap Diskriminasi Harga Penjualan Barang pada Pasar Kaget dan Pasar Tradisional

Authors

  • Yetti Yetti Lecturer
  • Yelia Natassa Winstar Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lancang Kuning
  • Miftahul Haq Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lancang Kuning

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22437/rr.v3i2.12388

Keywords:

Monopoly, Pasar Kaget, Price Discrimination

Abstract

The problem in this research, how is the regulation, the selling price of goods in shock market in traditional markets, and the perspective of business competition law. and the legal consequences caused by these prices. The purpose of research on how the flight system, the sale price of goods in shock markets and traditional markets and the legal prices caused by these nationalities. The method to achieve the goal is to conduct sociological law research, which is to see the implementation of laws in society. The results of the national research that took place in Pasar Kaget with traditional markets on basic food items. Small entrepreneurs who are in traditional markets feel disadvantaged by market traders who are shocked because market traders are surprised to give cheaper prices to consumers for the same goods. Thus the traditional market has more consumers. This happens because the law of business competition gives privileges to small traders to exercise a monopoly, which in this case is an airline. The legal consequence of the existence of a shock market is that because its establishment is not in accordance with criteria such as traditional markets, it is difficult to carry out supervision by the relevant officials, even though between traders and the principles of symbiotic mutualism. It is recommended that the government amend this law because with the freedom of small entrepreneurs that are detrimental to other small rulers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdul Manan, 2015, Peranan Hukum dalam Pembangunan Ekonomi, Prenada Media Group(Kencana), Jakarta, 2015

Andi Fahmi, dkk, Hukum Persaingan Usaha : Antara Teks dan Konteks. Jakarta : GTZ , 2009

Arie Siswanto, Hukum Persaingan Usaha , Ghaila Indonesia, Bogor, 2004

Dewi upitosari, Skripsi, Dampak Jumlah Pasar,Jumlah Pedagang Dan PAD Terhadap Pertumbuhan Ekonomi Kota Surakarta Sebelu Dan Sesudah Kebijakan Revitalisasi Pasar Tradisional (Surakarta : Universitas NegeriSebelas Maret,2011)

Lubis, Irsyad, Bank dan Lembaga Keuangan Lain, Medan: USU Press, 2010

Puji Ayu Wandira “Dampak Keberadaan Pasar Kaget Terhadap Pendapatan Pedagang Pasar Rumbai Kecamatan Rumbai Pesisir Ditinjau Menurut Ekonomi Islam Program Studi Ekonomi Syari’ah Fakultas Syari’ah Dan Hukum Universitas Islam Negeri Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau-Pekanbaru 1440 H/2018 M

Rokan, Mustafa Kamal. Hukum Persaingan Usaha : Teori dan Prakteknya diIndonesia, Rajawali Pers, Jakarta, 2014

Sawidji Widoatmodjo, Pengetahuan Pasar Modal, PT. Elex Media Komputindo, Jakarta, 2015

Wicak Hardika Putra, keberadaan dan perkembangan Pasar Kaget Rawajati Jakarta†Tesis. Program Studi Magister Teknik Pembangunan wilaya dan Kota, Universitas Diponegoro, Semarang 22 Februari 2010.

Dian Ayu Paramitha https://journal.stieken.ac.id/index.php/peta/article/view/406 Peran Pasar Kaget Terhadap Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Desa: Studi Deskriptif di Desa Cerme Kecamatan Grogol Kabupaten Kediri, Studi Deskriptif di Desa Cerme Kecamatan Grogol Kabupaten Kediri

Fajar Alan Syahrir, Jom FISIP. Volum 2 No.1 Februari 2015) Jurnal FISIP. Saprul Sinaga “pengeloaan pasar kaget oleh dinas Pasar Kota Pekanbaru di kecamatan Sailâ€. JOM FISIP VOL.4 NO. 1 Februari 2017)

http://m.riaupos.co/97238-berita-pedagang-pasar-kaget-dipindahkan.html: Jurnalisme Warga: Pasar Kaget, Alternatif Belanja Warga Pekanbaru)

Riau Com terkini: Rabu, 18 Februari 2015 19:33 Walikota Firdaus Sebut Keberadaan Pasar Kaget Seperti "Lingkaran Setan.

Downloads

Published

2021-12-31

How to Cite

Yetti, Y., Natassa Winstar, Y. . ., & Haq, M. (2021). Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha terhadap Diskriminasi Harga Penjualan Barang pada Pasar Kaget dan Pasar Tradisional. Recital Review, 3(2), 175-189. https://doi.org/10.22437/rr.v3i2.12388