Implementation And Enforcement Of Domestic Competition Laws

Evaluating the quality of implementation and enforcement in the Mediterranean Partners (MPs) is no easy task. The decisions adopted by the competition authorities of the MPs are generally not published, and many of these authorities are not bound to produce annual reports accessible to the public. The analysis that follows is thus based on data gathered from European Commission reports and from the specialized literature.

Implementation and Enforcement in the Candidate Countries

Competition law enforcement appears reasonably satisfactory in Turkey, Malta, and Cyprus. For instance, in 2000, the Turkish Competition Authority adopted 262 decisions relating to anticompetitive agreements and abuses of a dominant position, 101 decisions relating to mergers and acquisitions, and 23 decisions granting exemptions or negative clearances (Mumcu and Zengibonuz 2002). During 2001, Malta's Office of Fair Competition adopted 21 decisions (10 on restrictive agreements, 9 on abuses of a dominant position, and 2 on mergers). 157 The level of enforcement of competition rules was more modest in Cyprus than in the two prior countries in 2001, but it seems that Cyprus enhanced its capacity of control in 2002. 158

No final conclusion can, however, be drawn from these figures, since the nature of the decisions (inadmissibility, exemption, or sanction), and their respective proportion must also be considered to evaluate the effectiveness of the competition law regimes. What is encouraging is that these authorities have ruled on some major cases. Such cases are important as they contribute to raise the profile of the authorities and allow them to intervene in major sectors of the economy. For instance, the OECD's 2001 competition policy country report for Turkey indicates that the Turkish Competition Authority decid...

If you are already a vLex customer, Access Here