a tripartite report - Unctad

ZIMBABWE
With the growing political consensus and further
political improvement to which economic growth
and growth is expected.
1.2 Political Context of the Zimbabwe
Competition Law
There is generally a wide political support for
competition policy and law in Zimbabwe. This is
witnessed by the fact that there has never been
any political interference with the work of the
Competition and Tariffs Commission (“CTC”) even
at the times of economic hardships that Zimbabwe
underwent in the past decade of competition law
and policy implementation.
During the establishment of competition law and
policy in Zimbabwe, there was a Memorandum to
Cabinet Committee on Development regarding
the Establishment of a Monopolies Commission,
the then Minister of Industry and Commerce in
October 1992 recommended the adoption of the
the Minister made a number of key policy statements
on the form of competition policy that Zimbabwe
should adopt, including the one on “Need
for Competition Policy”.
Findings from interviewed stakeholder show that
there was a comprehensive competition policy
document prepared in late 1990s. Despite the con-
the CTC nor the Ministry of Commerce who are the
custodian of the document seems to know where
exactly the policy is to be found. Efforts to look for
it were met by an assertion that it is among the
tells that even though the policy could have been
made, it has not been practically used in providing
guidance on issues that it was meant to streamline.
Instead, the CTC has relied on the policy guidelines
of the Memorandum to the Cabinet Committee
on Development in guiding its competition operations
since its establishment.
While the reliance on the memorandum is a commendable
effort by CTC, it remains a fact that a
comprehensive policy on competition is required
in the Zimbabwean economy. Development of a
competition policy based on already existing doc-
175
uments and experience gathered from the decade
of implementation by CTC should be considered
as part of reforming the competition regime in
Zimbabwe.
1.2.1 Policy Goals
According to (Kububa, 2009) during the inception
of the competition regime in Zimbabwe, it was
argued that although the Structural Adjustment
Programme (SAP) through trade liberalization,
price decontrol, domestic deregulation and public
sector enterprise/parastatal reform would address
and remove some of the factors that had protected
monopolies, encouraged restrictive business
practices that hampered competition; monopolistic
tendencies and Restrictive Business Practices
(RBPs) will persist beyond 1995, hence the need to
regulate and control them.
It was further argued that regulations and controls
were moreover needed during the SAP period,
in order to guide the economy’s transition to a
market-oriented one. The regulations and controls
would be complementary to Zimbabwe’s efforts
to protect consumer welfare, promote economic
entrepreneurial base. These are still valid arguments
today, as they constitute the purpose of enacting
competition legislation in an economy.
The preliminary draft of the Monopolies and
Mergers Commission Bill was prepared by the
then Ministry of Industry and Commerce with the
assistance of two seconded competition experts
from the United States of America – one from the
Federal Trade Commission and the other an academic.
The draft borrowed heavily from the South
from the British and American practices. The draft
produced was submitted to the Attorney General’s
The Bill underwent a long-winded consultative
process involving major stakeholders, which included
two public seminars organized by the Friedrich
Naumann Foundation of Germany and the
Indigenous Business Development Centre, and association
of black businessmen with the primary
aim of promoting and facilitating black business
advancement and entrepreneurship.
Established businesses, particularly companies
enjoying monopolies or near monopolies in in-
ZIMBABWE