Jakarta (18/7) - The Indonesia Competition Commission (ICC) decided that PT Jakarta Propertindo (Perseroda) (Reported Party I), PT Pembangunan Perumahan (Persero) Tbk (Reported Party II), and PT Jaya Konstruksi Manggala Pratama Tbk (Reported Party III) were proven guilty in Decision Number 17/ICC-L/2022 on Alleged Violation of Article 22 of Law Number 5 of 1999 related to the Procurement of Works for the Jakarta Arts Center Revitalization Project Taman Ismail Marzuki Phase III which was read out today, Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at the ICC Office in Jakarta.

The hearing revealed elements of conspiracy, among them:

1. The action of the Reported Party I, which cancelled the tender without being based on a valid and accountable justification, proves that the cancellation of the tender was deliberately carried out by the Reported Party I as a form of action to facilitate the Reported Party II and Reported Party III (KSO) to become the winners of the tender a quo.
2. The action of the Reported Party I to provide an exclusive opportunity to the Reported Party II and the Reported Party III (KSO) in the Technical Evaluation, with a request for exposure of the Director of Human Resources and General Affairs to the technical evaluation results to the MK Consultant, which was then followed up with the fact of the cancellation of the tender, and the changes in the assessment procedures in the re-tender proved the exclusivity of the Reported Party I in facilitating the Reported Party II and the Reported Party III (KSO) to become the winner of the tender a quo. This is confirmed by the changes in the assessment procedures, the technical evaluation scores obtained by the Reported Party II and the Reported Party III (KSO) in the re-tender increased significantly enough to obtain a high percentage of technical evaluation scores.
3. The actions of the Reported Party II and the Reported Party III (KSO) in making a document adjustment both overtly and secretly. Although the facts of the hearing did not reveal any form of direct communication between the Reported Party I, the Reported Party II and the Reported Party III (KSO), there was a series of processes that showed the efforts of the Reported Party I to facilitate the Reported Party II and the Reported Party III (KSO) through the actions of the HR and General Director who intervened in the Procurement Team when the tender process was still running. Then followed up with the cancellation of the tender without being based on legitimate and accountable justification.

Based on the above description, the Commission Panel decided that Reported Party I, Reported Party II and Reported Party III were legally and convincingly proven to have violated Article 22 of Law Number 5 of 1999. The Commission Panel also imposed sanctions of Rp16,800,000,000 (sixteen billion eight hundred million rupiah) on the Reported Party II and Rp11,200,000,000 (eleven billion two hundred million rupiah) on the Reported Party III which must be deposited with the State Treasury.

The Commission Panel in its Decision also ordered the Reported Parties, among others:

1. The Reported Party I not to take any discriminatory action and/or any form of conspiracy to arrange or determine the winner of the tender in the future since the Reported Party receives notification of the ICC Decision.
2. The Reported Party I to eliminate the substance and/or clauses that have the same meaning as Clauses 38.2 and 38.3 of the Request for Proposal (RfP) document of the case a quo in every procurement organized by the Reported Party since the Reported Party received notification of the ICC Decision. 
3. The Reported Party I to report and/or submit the Request for Proposal (RfP) document upon completion of the procurement process organized by the Reported Party I for 2 (two) years since the Reported Party received notification of the ICC Decision.
4. Ordering the Reported Party I, Reported Party II and Reported Party III to implement the decision no later than 30 (thirty) days after this Decision becomes legally binding. Ordering the Reported Party II and Reported Party III to submit a bank guarantee of 20% (twenty percent) of the value of the fine to ICC no later than 14 (fourteen) days after receiving notification of this decision if they file an objection.