a tripartite report - Unctad

66 VOLUNTARY PEER REVIEW OF CLP: A TRIPARTITE REPORT ON THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA – ZAMBIA – ZIMBABWE
authority. Other competition authorities in both developed
and developing countries have had to deal
with laws that are not part of contemporary competition
law. In Australia for example, the Australian
Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)
was tasked with dealing with the Price Surveillance
Act, the Goods and Services Tax and other technical
regulatory responsibilities in the electricity sector.
The competition authority in Zimbabwe, aptly
known as “Competition and Tariff Commission”
deals with the Tariff Act as well. Clearly, the United
gion
where a competition authority deals with matters
as prescribed under the MMA and the MMR.
Considering the enormity of the task under MMA,
it is a task that requires a separate department/
inspectorate wing headed by a Director reporting
to the Director-General (who is the “Chief Inspector”).
The Government’s position of appointing
the FCC to perform counterfeit functions is justi-
terfeits
and consumer protection functions already
being performed by the FCC. Therefore it is likely
that attempts to remove these functions from the
FCC would be rejected. This is also coupled with
the fact that the Government would not agree to
create a separate statutory body to deal with the
MMA due to cost implications. In these circumstances,
the FCC appears to be a more suitable
“Chief Inspector” and may perform this role for an
unforeseeable future.
Enforcement of the MMA appears hinges on reports
being submitted to the Chief Inspector by
largely the IPR owner and there may be need to
review these means by other parties that may
be affected by counterfeits e.g. the traders who
may suspect their supplier to be engaged in the
scourge. This is in addition to consumers and consumer
organizations mentioned above.
3.4 Organization and Responsiveness
In so far as consumers and consumer organizations
are not able to report matters to the Commission,
the effectiveness of combating the vice
shall be affected. According to the Tanzanian Consumer
Advocacy Society (TCAS), there are severe
consumer’s rights violation and unfair business
conduct in the Tanzanian market that are not dealt
with, as shown in the table below:
(a) Mwananchi, 23 April 2007, Swahili newspaper had a title; Fake malaria drugs kill many Tanzanians.
(b) Sunday Citizen 10 December 2006 had an article with the title; Many Tanzanians not fully aware of their
rights.
(c) The Guardian dated 11 July 2007, for example, reported that banned HIV/AIDS life prolonging drug –EMTRI
Social Welfare, was still circulating in Kisarawe district, Coast region despite an outcry by anti-AIDS activists
(d) The Citizen of 28 July 2007, had a title; “In for an injection, out with a limp” some people come out of the
injection room with an abscess only shows up several weeks later; others come out with disabilities for life.
(e) The Guardian of 19 August 2007 had the title “Fake goods impede producers – Producers are deeply
to thrive”.
(f) The Guardian of 12 September 2007 reported that; Bulk of Kariakoo imported goods fake – about 50 per
cent of all imported goods from China and sold in Kariakoo shops in Dar es Salaam are counterfeit.
(g) The Guardian of 4 November 2007; Fake Medicines Pose Big Threat –Counterfeit Medicines In Tanzania; the
story continued
and Upjohn, was found in circulation in some pharmacies in the country.
May 2000, counterfeit Ampicillin capsules (250mg) were found circulating in some retail pharmacies.
roquine
Injection (from an unregistered Indian company) was relabeled as Quinine Dihydrochloride
Injection 600mg/2ml from a company in Cyprus.