Article Sidebar
-
Antitrust Law, Corporate Governance, Legal Aspects
Abstract
Background: Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are integral to corporate strategies, playing a crucial role in business expansion and market consolidation. In Indonesia, the legal framework surrounding M&A is complex and influenced by various laws and regulations. The legal aspects of M&A transactions, including corporate governance, antitrust laws, and the protection of minority shareholders, are pivotal in ensuring that these corporate actions are legally sound and contribute to economic development. However, challenges such as regulatory ambiguities, incomplete legal integration, and inadequate enforcement mechanisms often hinder the smooth execution of M&A transactions.
Objective: This study aims to analyze the legal aspects of mergers and acquisitions in Indonesia, focusing on the regulatory framework, legal procedures, and challenges faced by companies engaged in M&A. The research seeks to identify key legal considerations that impact the success and failure of M&A transactions in Indonesia, with a particular focus on corporate governance and antitrust regulations.
Method: A qualitative research design was employed, utilizing legal document analysis, case studies, and interviews with legal professionals, corporate lawyers, and business executives. This approach allows for a comprehensive understanding of the legal landscape and practical challenges in M&A transactions.
Results: The findings indicate that while Indonesia has a well-established legal framework for M&A, issues related to regulatory compliance, transparency, and legal enforcement remain significant obstacles.
Conclusion: The study concludes that while the legal aspects of M&A in Indonesia are progressing, further improvements in regulatory clarity, enforcement, and corporate governance are needed to foster a more conducive environment for M&A transactions.
Full text article
References
Berrizbeitia, G. (2024). The Political Economy of Arbitration Law. Yale Law Journal, 134(1), 266–326. Scopus.
Bradford, A. (2024). THE FALSE CHOICE BETWEEN DIGITAL REGULATION AND INNOVATION. Northwestern University Law Review, 119(2), 377–454. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4753107
Burdette, H. (2024). The Sustainability Paradox: A Competitive Case for Sustainability Agreements. George Washington Law Review, 92(1), 248–272. Scopus.
Chung, C. Y., Hasan, I., Hwang, J., & Kim, I. (2024). The Effects of Antitrust Laws on Horizontal Mergers: International Evidence. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 59(7), 3267–3298. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022109023000467
Colombo, C. M., Wright, K., & Eliantonio, M. (2024). The evolving governance of EU competition law in a time of disruptions: A constitutional perspective. Dalam The Evol. Gov. Of EU Compet. Law in a Time of Disruptions: A Constitutional Perspect. (hlm. 368). Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.; Scopus. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85190623548&partnerID=40&md5=05fb036ea9dea4deae670d707a83863b
Cramm, S. (2024). The German Trade Union Confederation and the cartel policy of the early European communities. Dalam The Development of European Competition Policy: Soc. Democracy and Regulation (hlm. 70–96). Taylor and Francis; Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351010573-4
Currie, M.-J., Torres, S., Eveleigh, J., & Kleyn, M. (2024). The interplay between antitrust law and intellectual property law in South Africa: A critical analysis of the OECD Recommendation on intellectual property rights and competition. Journal of European Competition Law and Practice, 15(8), 551–556. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeclap/lpae068
Da Silva Oliveira Neto, D., Augusto De Oliveira Cruz Filho, O., & Cordeiro Macedo, A. (2024). The rule of reason and the fundamentals against more presumption-based illegality legal standards: Highlights on CADE’s decisions on digital economy issues. Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, 12(3), 570–587. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnad042
Daguerre, R. C. (2024). United States v. Paramount, Inc: Sparking and Curbing Both Legal and Cultural Revolutions in a Constitutional State. Cuestiones Constitucionales, 25(51). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.22201/iij.24484881e.2024.51.19251
Delvasto, C., & Acevedo, R. (2025). Why do people think price fixing is unfair? An empirical legal study on public attitudes in the USA. Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, 13(1), 134–163. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaenfo/jnae007
Edelman, M., Grow, N., & Holden, J. (2025). THE RE-MONOPOLIZATION OF THE U.S. SPORTS TRADING CARD INDUSTRY. University of Illinois Law Review, 2025(1), 63–108. Scopus.
Fletcher, A., Crémer, J., Heidhues, P., Kimmelman, G., Monti, G., Podszun, R., Schnitzer, M., Morton, F. S., & de Streel, A. (2024). THE EFFECTIVE USE OF ECONOMICS IN THE EU DIGITAL MARKETS ACT§§. Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 20(1–2), 1–19. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/joclec/nhad018
Grzejdziak, L. (2024). U.S. and EU Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines: A Friendly Game of Leapfrog. German Law Journal, 25(9), 1494–1524. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2024.44
Hafiz, H. (2024). THE LAW OF GEOGRAPHIC LABOR MARKET INEQUALITY. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 172(5), 1183–1290. Scopus.
Hazlett, T. W. (2024). U.S. Antitrust Policy in the Age of Amazon, Google, Microsoft, Apple, Netflix and Facebook. Constitutional Political Economy, 35(1), 73–108. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10602-022-09391-9
Heermann, P. W. (2024). Will the football agents’ service fee cap survive the current legal attacks?: Regulation of football agents between the poles of autonomy of sports organisations and EU antitrust law. International Sports Law Journal, 24(2), 188–203. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40318-024-00279-4
Huffman, M. (2024). The Shifting Regulation and Competition Interface. Market and Competition Law Review, 8(1), 15–32. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.34632/mclawreview.2024.16135
Kazenoff, H. (2025). TO SURMOUNT PARAMOUNT DECREES BY DEGREES. Catholic University Law Review, 74(1), 91–120. Scopus.
Kizilkaya, S. (2024). The mediating role of physician trust in the relationship between medical mistrust and health-care system distrust. Cirugia y Cirujanos (English Edition), 92(1), 46–51. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.24875/CIRU.23000102
Kramer, J. A., & Lechner, M. (2024). The Fight for the Right to Repair. Antitrust Bulletin, 69(2–4), 126–138. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003603X241255460
Lai, S., & Zhang, J. (2024). THE TENSION BETWEEN PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATIONS AND PRIVATE ACTIONS UNDER CHINA’S ANTI-MONOPOLY LAW. Tsinghua China Law Review, 16(1). Scopus. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85195211116&partnerID=40&md5=167d642e35bd3b4ca7a0cfe091fc444c
Marosi, Z., & Gergely, B. (2024). The Issue of Consumer Compensation Before Antitrust Authorities: Commitments, Cooperation and Competence: The Hungarian Experience. World Competition, 47(1), 125–142. Scopus.
McWilliams, J. M. (2024). The Future of Medicare and the Role of Traditional Medicare as Competitor. New England Journal of Medicine, 391(8), 763–769. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsb2313939
Mittler, J. N., Abraham, J. M., Robbins, J., & Song, P. H. (2024). To be or not to be compliant? Hospitals’ initial strategic responses to the federal price transparency rule. Health Services Research, 59(4). Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.14252
Nikalje, M. M. (2024). Unravelling the Metaverse: Examining Competition Law and Necessitating Regulatory Evolution in the Indian Context. Dalam Intellect. Property Rights and Competition Law in India (hlm. 141–152). Taylor and Francis; Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003471523-12
Sanders, S. D. (2024). Wages, Talent, and Demand for NCAA Sport After the Alston v. NCAA Antitrust Case. Journal of Sports Economics, 25(2), 169–185. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1177/15270025231217970
Sarkar Bose, A., & Sarkar, S. (2024). Welfare implications of information sharing by integrated e-retailers. Applied Economics Letters. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2024.2302868
Symeonidis, G. (2024). Unprofitable Cartels: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in the UK. Review of Industrial Organization, 64(3), 421–447. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-023-09942-w
The Law of Antitrust. (2024). Dalam Legal Medicine: Health Care Law and Medical Ethics, Eighth Edition (hlm. 113-117.e4). Elsevier; Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-12128-9.00018-8
Treuren, L. (2024). The potential and limitations of competition to achieve sustainability1. Dalam Research Handb. On Sustainability and Competition Law (hlm. 50–68). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.; Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802204667.00011
Veljanovski, C. (2024). Why the case for a sustainable competition law is exaggerated. Dalam Research Handb. On Sustainability and Competition Law (hlm. 211–234). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.; Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802204667.00021
Vlahek, A. (2024). The Great Saga of Collective Redress in EU Competition Law: All Cry and No Wool? World Competition, 47(1), 53–72. Scopus.
Werden, G. J. (2024). Vertical Restraints. Dalam Elgar Encyclopedia on the Economics of Competition, Regulation and Antitrust (hlm. 242–246). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.; Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781802200546.00045
Wu, P. (2024). The refusal to license intellectual property as an antitrust violation in China: How should the current approach be improved? Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, 14(1), 7–28. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.4337/qmjip.2024.01.01
Zoetis under antitrust investigation by EU. (2024). Veterinary Record, 194(10), 374. Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1002/vetr.4277
Authors
Copyright (c) 2025 Karan Singh, Vishal Yadav, Ananya Rao
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
