A number of recent developments illustrate the challenges the Indonesian competition authority, the KPPU, faces in seeking to achieve compliance with competition law norms in a country with more than 500 local and provincial governments governing people living on 922 permanently inhabited islands speaking 700 different languages.

Each of the 500 governments in Indonesia are responsible for substantial public procurement exercises, including the construction of schools, hospitals, public transport infrastructure, municipal buildings, flood drainage projects and other international aid sponsored programs. Fighting bid rigging in public procurement, and corrupt complicity with bid rigging conduct by government officials, continues to be the single top priority of the KPPU. The latest cases concern bid rigging and discriminatory practices in connection with the establishment of a new semitraditional market in East Java Province and a hospital in Southeast Sumatera. The conduct in the former case was facilitated by an industry association and in addition to enforcement activities, the KPPU recommended a number of new initiatives to better supervise the creation of industry associations.

In recent years the KPPU has also made more tentative steps into running cases against international companies based on economic, and often more contentious, theories of harm (rather than per se cases). In this vein, the KPPU has made a ruling against a major Western energy company in relation to conduct concerning an export pipeline FEED project that the KPPU regarded as discriminatory.

Until recent years, merger administration in Indonesia was also complicated by the lack of secondary legislation imposing reporting requirements. Nevertheless, the KPPU did manage to take a small number of merger enforcement matters (e.g., against an international supermarket chain). However, merger filing requirements (of a rather peculiar post-closing nature) were introduced in 2010 and since that time approximately 80 cases have been processed. As occurs in most jurisdictions, the vast majority of mergers have been approved in Indonesia. While the KPPU's analytical approach to mergers is still developing, it appears that the organization is quickly attaining credibility in this area.

Indonesia has quickly developed a credible competition regime. While there are some very substantial challenges to effectively permeating awareness of and compliance with competition law throughout the economy, the KPPU appears to be engaged with the task. We expect to see a continuing maturity of the types of analysis being undertaken by the KPPU and at some point a broadening focus away from just public sector bid rigging.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.