“EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION REGIME IN

Transcript:“EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION REGIME IN:
“EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION REGIME IN OTHER DEVELOPING COUNTRIES: LESSONS FOR BANGLADESH” 2nd July, 2012 Ratnesh Sahay, Advisor Indian Competition Law: Objectives Make the market work for the benefit and welfare of consumers Ensure fair and healthy competition in the Indian market for faster and inclusive growth and development of economy Implement competition policies with an aim to effectuate the most efficient utilization of economic resources Develop and nurture effective relations and interactions with Sectoral Regulators Effectively carry out competition advocacy Share information on benefits of competition to build competition culture among stakeholders 2 Mechanism to achieve objectives Instruments: Competition Act, 2002 and Competition Commission of India (CCI) CCI shall endeavour to prohibit all kinds of anti-competitive agreements, parallel and coordinated behaviour including cartels and to prevent abuse of dominant position by enterprises, and regulates combinations. It shall give opinion on competition issues on a reference received from an authority established under any law (statutory authority) /Central Government/ a State Government. CCI shall undertake competition advocacy, create public awareness and impart training on competition issues. 3 How far were the objectives achieved? Enforcement of the Act Challenges Encourage filing of information/complaint Independent and effective investigation Quick disposal but in a fair and transparent manner Leniency/ Lesser penalty in deserving cases Achievements Received a total no of 264 cases u/s 19(1)(a), as on date Maximum cases were received from the Entertainment, Banks & Finance, Electricity, Pharmaceuticals and Real Estate Sectors, cement, tyres, etc 201 cases have been disposed off and rest is either closed or pending investigation. The Commission ordered investigation by DG in total 132 cases out of which the DG has already submitted report in 106 cases. The Commission also decided to close 47 cases under Section 26(2) of the Act, after considering all facts and material available on the record. 4 Suo-moto Cases The Act empowers the Commission to initiate suo-motu action against anti-competitive conduct sugar cartels, onion price, airlines air fare, petroleum prices, milk prices, etc Gathering evidence in number of such cases was found to be difficult In other jurisdictions like FTC/DOJ or EU a large number of information is provided by the whistleblowers who files leniency applications to get immunity. In India, this has not picked up though there is a provision in the Act for Leniency. So, this is a big challenge not only for India but for all developing countries where cartels are