Final Report - World Trade Organization

More documents

Recommendations

Info

It was noted that except for South Africa, cooperation on competition has almost been absent. There are a number of reasons for these countries not going for any kind of cooperation or are unwilling to approach other CAs for assistance. There is a general sense of apathy and disinterest in pursuing cases (low political priority, salary scales lower than that of other public sector entities etc.). There is, somewhat legitimate fear of awkward policy transfer and there are political economy issues like public perception of external interference in domestic issues (eg. privatization program). Cooperation arrangements can be very beneficial for developing countries particularly when they lack resources and experience to deal with complex anti-competitive practices of MNCs. It would provide them with an opportunity to learn and exchange information. This might also reduce jurisdictional disputes and give an opportunity to create “islands of good governance”. State of Discussions at the WTO Working Group on Interaction between Trade and Competition Policy was also briefly discussed at the meeting. A brief presentation on the proposed possible elements of a multilateral framework on competition policy was made. It was emphasised that some developing countries are concerned that competition policy would restrict their ability to use industrial policy and support small businesses according to their national development strategy. However, competition policy and law can be structured in such a way to ensure that these objectives are not compromised. It was also pointed out that any committee set up under the WTO for Competition should not be limited to narrow monitoring of the agreement but should be a forum for international debate on competition and its interface with trade and regulatory policies and laws. The last session of the meeting was on the way ahead to promote healthy competition culture, especially in developing countries. Discussions were mainly based on the experiences gathered during the implementation of the project and the suggestion made by different stakeholders in the project countries and other experts during several meetings organised at different levels. But before going for a discussion on the way ahead some concluding observations on the previous sessions were made: l Success in implementing competition law in developing countries is a matter of credibility as well as resources. l Political will is crucial to success. In several cases, it is seen that the CA may have the will to try and act even when the government is blocking it. l Personality of CA head may be important l Case studies show that it is possible to impose conditions on mergers of MNCs. l Alleged predation did arise in the case studies: allegations of unfairly cheap imports is a key concern in some countries, like Zambia. l There is very little cooperation as yet, but where it was requested, it paid off. However, there might be a need for an asymmetric agreement so that developing country Authorities would not have to respond to information requests in the same way. On the basis of the presentations made under this session, certain common needs were identified for all countries of the project. The important ones are: l Cooperation between regulatory authorities and CA: a regulatory forum exists in South Africa but it might be more on paper than in practice. l Necessity of a strong consumer movement. It is reasonably strong in India and growing Pakistan but not so in other countries. l The laws need to be translated in simple language and people need to be educated l Zambia Competition Commission has the best structure. Though all stakeholders are not fully educated, this is the only CA which has maximum representation For a small country, there is not necessarily a need for a separate consumer protection law but the competition law can be further improved upon to include consumer protection provisions.
CUTS Centre for Competition, Investment & Economic Regulation Mission To be a centre of excellence on regulatory issues Develop healthy competition regimes in developing countries through research and advocacy. Goals Strengthen capacity of state and non-state actors on relevant issues, particularly in developing countries. Foster an enabling environment for the economy and promote effective regulatory frameworks. International Advisory Board Professor Frederic Jenny Vice President, Conseil de la concurrence, Paris, France, and Chairman of the Advisory Board Mr. Robert Anderson Counsellor, WTO, Geneva, Switzerland Mr. Allan Asher Director, Consumers Association, London, UK Dr. Beatriz Boza Former Chairperson, INDECOPI, Lima, Peru Mr. Philippe Brusick Head, Competition and Consumer Policy Branch, UNCTAD, Geneva, Switzerland Dr. S. Chakravarthy Former Member, MRTP Commission, Hyderabad, India Dr. Simon Evenett Director of Economic Research, World Trade Institute, Berne, Switzerland Dr. Merit Janow Professor of International Trade Law, Columbia University, New York, USA Dr. Saman Kelegama Director, Institute of Policy Studies, Colombo, Sri Lanka Dr. R. Shyam Khemani Advisor, Competition Policy, World Bank, Washington DC, USA Dr. Gesner Oliveira Former President of CADE, Sao Paulo, Brazil Mr. Menzi Simelane Commissioner, Competition Commission, Pretoria, South Africa Dr. Taimoon Stewart Research Fellow, University of West Indies, St. Augustine, Trinidad & Tobago Mr. Pradeep S. Mehta Secretary General, Consumer Unity & Trust Society, Jaipur, India
Page 1 and 2:
PULLING UP OUR SOCKS - A STUDY OF C
Page 3 and 4:
PULLING UP OUR SOCKS -A Study of Co
Page 5 and 6:
C O N T E N T S LIST OF TABLES.....
Page 7 and 8:
List of Tables Table 1: Socio-Econo
Page 9 and 10:
Foreword Since the second part of t
Page 11 and 12:
Preface The title of this research
Page 13 and 14:
Executive Summary Introduction Tran
Page 15 and 16:
Table A: Human Resources in the Com
Page 17 and 18:
Chapter-1 Introduction: The 7-Up Pr
Page 19 and 20:
Chapter-2 Socio-Economic Context of
Page 21 and 22:
Table 2: Industrial Structure India
Page 23 and 24:
countries, state-owned enterprises
Page 25 and 26:
Chapter-3 Background and Objectives
Page 27 and 28:
In Kenya, most transactions in the
Page 29 and 30:
In India, engineering services, ele
Page 31 and 32:
promulgated in 1988 had ‘control
Page 33 and 34:
Chapter-4 Scope and Coverage 66 4.1
Page 35 and 36:
Sri Lanka’s Fair Trading Commissi
Page 37 and 38:
competition law doesn’t frown so
Page 39 and 40:
dominance’ investigations, focusi
Page 41 and 42:
takes over or merges with ‘x’ t
Page 43 and 44:
a state’s exercise of governmenta
Page 45 and 46:
Table 4: Practice specific exemptio
Page 47 and 48:
Table 5: Enterprise specific exempt
Page 49 and 50:
The approach of the South African a
Page 51 and 52:
Chapter-5 The Competition Authoriti
Page 53 and 54:
This bundling of powers is increasi
Page 55 and 56:
The methods of analysing the static
Page 57 and 58:
Table 8: Facilities Country India K
Page 59 and 60:
Commission in handling cases. It al
Page 61 and 62:
Further, the competition authoritie
Page 63 and 64:
all 7-Up countries can learn from t
Page 65 and 66:
Chapter-6 Competition Authorities:
Page 67 and 68:
In a globalising world it may be a
Page 69 and 70:
It can well be expected that when t
Page 71 and 72:
CAs are not aware of many of the in
Page 73 and 74:
Chapter-7 Competition Issues with I
Page 75 and 76:
Box 1: International Cartels - The
Page 77 and 78:
administrative fine not exceeding t
Page 79 and 80:
corporations: GE and Honeywell, bec
Page 81 and 82:
Box 3: The Cola Saga in India The c
Page 83 and 84:
to the removal of quantitative rest
Page 85 and 86:
Chapter-8 Conclusions and Recommend
Page 87 and 88:
acking of the government or lacks t
Page 89 and 90: ones is their general lack of funds
Page 91 and 92: 2. International donors could finan
Page 93 and 94: hands of a few families, Pakistan
Page 95 and 96: Annexure-1: The Acts Country Year A
Page 97 and 98: COUNTRY PARTNERS 1. India National
Page 99 and 100: Annexure Table 2a: Coverage of Enti
Page 101 and 102: Annexure Table 3a: Monopolisation,
Page 103 and 104: Annexure Table 3b: Restrictive Trad
Page 105 and 106: Annexure Table 3c: Mergers & Acquis
Page 107 and 108: Annexure Table 3d: Unfair Trade Pra
Page 109 and 110: Annexure Table 4b: Status, Power an
Page 111 and 112: Annexure Table 4c: Sanctions and Re
Page 113 and 114: Annexure-4 SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE Com
Page 115 and 116: 16. How many Members (Governing Com
Page 117 and 118: 26. What is the system of evaluatio
Page 119 and 120: 38. What powers and functions does
Page 121 and 122: 52. If yes, what are the criteria f
Page 123 and 124: 58. Status of pending (from the dat
Page 125 and 126: 65. Time taken for completion of ad
Page 127 and 128: 75. What are the obstacles that the
Page 129 and 130: 94. (a) If any, which are the secto
Page 131 and 132: Annexure-5 What the Stakeholders Th
Page 133 and 134: This is particularly true in the ca
Page 135 and 136: Advocacy The NRGs also felt that it
Page 137 and 138: Frederic Jenny, Chairman of the WTO
Page 139: insignificant market share prior to
show all

Final Report - World Trade Organization

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?