a. Berdasarkan Keputusan Komisi Pengawas
Persaingan Usaha (KPPU) perkara
No. 26/KPPU-L/2007 sehubungan dengan adanya dugaan pelanggaran Pasal 5
Undang-undang No. 5 tahun 1999
(UU No. 5/1999) tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat mengenai penetapan tarif pesan singkat (SMS), yaitu sebagai berikut:
a. The Commission for the Supervision of
Business Competition (KPPU) had issued decision No. 26/KPPU-L/2007 in relation to the alleged violations of the Law No. 5 year 1999 act. 5 concerning Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business in determination of the short message service (SMS) tariff, for the following:
- Bahwa KPPU telah memberikan
laporan Pemeriksaan Perkara
No. 26/KPPU-L/2007, yang
menyimpulkan PT Mobile-8 Telecom Tbk terbukti melanggar pasal 5 UU No. 5/1999.
- KPPU had given the investigation
report case No. 26/KPPU-L/2007, which concluded that PT Mobile-8 Telecom Tbk has proven to violate the Law No. 5 year 1999 act 5.
- Bahwa selanjutnya, pada tanggal
18 Juni 2008, perkara aquo telah diputus oleh KPPU, dengan putusan yaitu:
- PT Mobile-8 Telecom Tbk
terbukti melanggar pasal 5 Undang-undang No 5 tahun
- Furthermore, on June 18, 2008, the aquo case has been decided by KPPU, with decision:
- PT Mobile-8 Telecom Tbk
proved violating the Law No. 5 year 1999 act 5.
1999.
- PT Mobile-8 Telecom Tbk
dikenakan denda sebesar
Rp 5.000.000.000 dan dituduh
mengakibatkan kerugian
konsumen periode tahun 2004 sampai dengan 2007 sebesar Rp 52.300.000.000.
- PT Mobile-8 Telecom Tbk was
fined to pay Rp 5,000,000,000 and being suspected of creating customers loss for the years 2004 to 2007 amounting to Rp 52,300,000,000.
Perusahaan telah mengajukan keberatan terhadap putusan KPPU tersebut yang
terdaftar dalam register perkara
No. 03/KPPU/2008/PN.JKT.PST dan
sampai dengan tanggal penyelesaian laporan keuangan ini, Perusahaan masih menunggu proses persidangan lebih lanjut.
The Company filed an objection on such
decision with case registration
No. 03/KPPU/2008/PN.JKT.PST and as of the date of completion of the consolidated financial statements, the Company is still waiting for further court process.
b. Pada tanggal 14 Juni 2011, Perusahaan
telah memenangkan gugatan di Pengadilan Tata Usaha Negara terhadap tagihan kekurangan pembayaran BHP ISR dan BHP pita frekuensi tahun pertama dari Kementerian Komunikasi dan Informatika (Kemenkominfo).
b. On June 14, 2011, the Company has won the lawsuits at Administrative Court against under payment of BHP ISR and BHP frequency band for the first year filed by Minister of Communication and Information Technology (Kemenkominfo).
Kemenkominfo telah melakukan upaya
banding terhadap keputusan PTUN
tersebut. Pengadilan Tinggi TUN, melalui Putusan tertanggal 5 Desember 2011, menguatkan putusan PTUN. Pada tanggal
20 Januari 2012, Kemenkominfo
mengajukan permohonan kasasi ke
Mahkamah Agung.
The Minister of Communication and
Information Technology submitted an
appeal on the Administrative court decision. The High Court of Justice, through a verdict dated December 5, 2011, uphold the Administrative court decision. On January 20, 2012, Minister of Communication and Information Technology filed a cassation to the Supreme Court.
Mahkamah Agung telah menolak
permohonan kasasi dari Kemenkominfo. Salinan Keputusan Kasasi di MA telah dikirimkan oleh PTUN pada tanggal 6 September 2013.
The Supreme Court has rejected the
cassation filed by Minister of
Communication and Information
Technology. Copy of the Supreme Court
decision has been delivered by
Administrative Court on September 6, 2013.
Pada tanggal 4 Nopember 2011,
Perusahaan mengajukan gugatan baru terhadap keputusan Kemenkominfo tentang penetapan besaran dan waktu pembayaran BHP pita frekuensi tahun kedua. Pada tanggal 22 Pebruari 2012, PTUN telah
mengeluarkan salinan putusan yang
mengabulkan seluruh gugatan, menunda
pelaksanaan keputusan kemenkominfo
sampai ada putusan berkekuatan hukum tetap, membatalkan objek gugatan dan memerintahkan Kemenkominfo mencabut objek gugatan dan menerbitkan kepmen baru.
On November 4, 2011, the Company filed a new lawsuit against the decision from Minister of Communication and Information Technology on determination of the amount and timing of BHP frequency band payment for the second year. On 22 February 2012, the Administration court issued a copy of a verdict in which granting all the lawsuits, delaying the execution of the decision from Minister of Communication and Information Technology until there is an incracht verdict, aborting the object of the lawsuits and ordering Minister of Communication and Information Technology to repeal the object of the lawsuits and issue the new
ministerial decree. Pada tanggal 25 April 2012, Kemenkominfo
mengajukan keberatan dengan
mengajukan banding kepada Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara.
On April 25, 2012, The Minister of
Communication and Information
Technology submitted an appeal to the State Administrative High Court.
Pada tanggal 10 Juli 2012, Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara mengeluarkan keputusan yang menguatkan keputusan PTUN. Atas putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara ini Kemenkominfo tidak mengajukan Kasasi ke Mahkamah Agung,
sehingga Putusan ini telah menjadi
keputusan yang berkekuatan hukum tetap.
On July 10, 2012, the State Administrative High Court issue a decision in which strengthening the Administrative Court decision. Upon this State Administrative
High Court’s decision, Minister of
Communication and Information
Technology did not submit the cassation to the Supreme Court which made this decision became an incracht verdict.
Pada tanggal 6 Desember 2012,
Perusahaan mengajukan gugatan baru di PTUN terhadap penetapan Kemenkominfo tentang besaran dan waktu pembayaran BHP pita frekuensi tahun ketiga. Pada tanggal 11 Desember 2012, PTUN telah mengeluarkan salinan penetapan yang mengabulkan seluruh gugatan, menunda pelaksanaan keputusan Kemenkominfo sampai ada putusan berkekuatan hukum tetap.
On December 6, 2012, the Company filed a new lawsuit the State Administrative High Court against the determination of the amount and timing by the Minister of
Communication and Information
Technology of payment for cost of frequency spectrum usage (BHP) in the third year of implementation of the frequency band. On December 11, 2012, the State Administrative High Court has
approved all the case/claim, delay
execution of Minister of Communication and Information Technology decision. Pada tanggal 5 Maret 2013, Kemenkominfo
mengajukan banding ke Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara.
On March 5, 2013, The Ministry of
Communication and Information
Technology submitted an appeal to the State Administrative High Court.
Pada tanggal 26 Agustus 2013, Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara mengeluarkan keputusan yang menguatkan keputusan PTUN.
On August 26, 2013, the State
Administrative High Court issued a decision concurring with the Administrative Court Decision.
Mematuhi keputusan-keputusan Kasasi MA dan Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara
terhadap gugatan-gugatan yang
dimenangkan oleh perusahaan, pada tanggal 6 November 2013 Kemenkominfo
telah menerbitkan empat Kepmen
mengenai tagihan BHP pita frekuensi tahun pertama, tahun kedua, tahun ketiga dan tahun keempat. Perusahaan telah melunasi tagihan BHP Pita Frekuensi sesuai dengan Kepmen tersebut. Sebagai hasil dari pembayaran BHP frekuensi ini, Perusahaan telah mendapatkan sertifikat izin pita
spektrum frekuensi radio dari
Kemenkominfo.
Comply with cassation decisions of the
Supreme Court and the State
Administrative High Court against claims that won by the Company, on November 6, 2013 Ministry of Communication and Information has published four ministerial Decree regarding the first year, second year, third year, fourth year frequency spectrum usage bills. The Company has paid the frequency spectrum usage bills in accordance with the ministerial Decree. As result of this payment, the Company obtained frequency spectrum license from Kemenkominfo.
c. Smartel, Entitas anak telah mengupayakan peninjauan kembali atas pengenaan Biaya Hak Penggunaan (BHP) spektrum frekuensi oleh Kemenkominfo. Hal ini terkait dengan
perbedaan interpretasi penerapan
Peraturan Menteri Komunikasi dan
Informatika karena alokasi pita frekuensi yang dimiliki Smartel tidak secara jelas tercakup dalam peraturan tersebut.
c. Smartel, a subsidiary, has requested to conduct review on charging of cost of frequency spectrum usage (BHP) by the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology. This is in relation to a different interpretation of the implementation of the
Regulation of the Minister of
Communication and Information
Technology for the allocation of frequency bands in which Smartel is not clearly covered by this regulation.
Smartel telah mengajukan gugatan melalui PTUN atas masalah ini. Pada tanggal
27 Desember 2011, PTUN telah
mengeluarkan salinan putusan yang
mengabulkan seluruh gugatan,
membatalkan objek gugatan dan
memerintahkan Kemenkominfo mencabut objek gugatan. Kemenkominfo mengajukan banding ke Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara pada tanggal 5 Januari 2012.
Smartel filed lawsuits through
Administrative court decision on this matter. On December 27, 2011, the Administration court issued a copy of a verdict in which granting all the lawsuits, aborting the object of the lawsuits and ordering Minister of
Communication and Information
Technology to repeal the object of the lawsuits. The Minister of Communication and Information Technology Submitted an appeal to the State Administrative High Court on January 5, 2012.
Pada tanggal 16 Mei 2012, Pengadilan Tinggi Tata Usaha Negara menolak
banding dari Kemenkominfo, dan
memutuskan menguatkan keputusan
PTUN.
On May 16, 2012, the State Administrative High Court rejected the appeal and strengthening the Administrative Court decision.
Pada tanggal 20 Juli 2012, Kemenkominfo
mengajukan permohonan kasasi ke
Mahkamah Agung. Pada tanggal 6 Agustus 2012, Smartel memasukkan kontra memori kasasi ke Mahkamah Agung melalui PTUN.
On July 20, 2012, the Minister of
Communication and Information
Technology filed a cessation to the Supreme Court. On August 6, 2012, Smartel submitted contra of memory cassation to Supreme Court through the Administration Court.