Research On Settlement System Of Anti-Trust Law Enforcement

The anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system is an anti-monopoly law enforcement method which is based on the equal and voluntary basis of law enforcement agencies and suspected monopolistic operators to terminate the investigation through negotiation and settlement agreement in the implementation of the anti-monopoly law.Compared with the traditional law enforcement methods,for the law enforcement agencies,the way of suspending or terminating the case investigation by means of a settlement agreement with the operator,can maximize the law enforcement efficiency and save the law enforcement costs so that the efficiency center value orientation can be achieved.However,as one of the ways to realize the value of anti-monopoly,the goal of the reconciliation system is not only to improve the efficiency of law enforcement,but also to strive for the balance between fairness and efficiency.On the one hand,it is necessary to crack down on monopoly behaviors,especially those which seriously undermine the order of market competition.On the other hand,in the face of increasing monopoly cases with increasing investigation difficulty,the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system is an institutional design to meet the needs of realities,and has gradually become a way of improving law enforcement efficiency in various developed countries and regions.Firstly,the theory of private interests of public law has been paid more and more attention and been perfected in the modern national governance theory,which provides a solid sociological and legal theoretical basis for the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system.Secondly,the application and development of the cost-benefit theory provides economic optics for the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system.At the same time,the United States,the European Union and other countries and regions have established relatively perfect systems in the legislation of the system and have made fruitful progress in the field of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system.Based on the foreign advanced legislative practice and experience of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system,and in view of the reality of our country's economic and social development,this paper tries to do a comprehensive and in-depth study on the enforcement reconciliation in the implementation of anti-monopolylaw.And the goal of this study is to put forward a relatively perfect the implementation of anti-monopoly law for the current system construction of our country.This paper focuses on the legal definition of the concept,theoretical basis,value basis analysis,the scope and conditions,and the supervision and implementation of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system,and closely surrounding the law enforcement agencies,the surveyed operators,the third party and the public.The purpose of this study is to focus on three levels: First of all,the basic theoretical issues of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system,conceptual definition and other issues of multi-level and multi-dimensional research;Secondly,through the introduction,reference and comparison of the system for the major developed countries to provide specific maneuverability for China's legislation and law enforcement practice;Thirdly,considering the legislative practice of our country,especially under the background of the reform of the anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies,some suggestions are put forward for the perfection of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in our country.The following five research methods which this paper mainly adopts can achieve the above objectives.Firstly,literature analysis is adopted to study the United States,the European Union,Australia,Japan and other major developed countries and regions of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system construction,development and evolution;Secondly,comparative analysis is adopted to compare and analyze the legislation and law enforcement practices of the above-mentioned countries with the situation in China,especially in terms of the applicable conditions of the system,the protection of third parties,and the benefit game between law enforcement agencies and operators.Thirdly,the historical analysis method is adopted to study the United States,the European Union and other countries' law enforcement reconciliation system generation and development of the historical background,causes and purposes,in full consideration of the historical,economic,political,legal,and human environment of the object of study,to draw its development laws,evolution trends and historical significance;fourth is the reality.The fourth is the empirical research method is adopted which merely focuses on the typical cases of the United States and the European Union in recent years,as well as a comprehensive analysis of the competition law enforcement reports of theGeneral Administration of Industry and Commerce and the Ministry of Commerce from2008 to 2018,through empirical research methods to provide a test standard for theoretical research;Fifthly,the law economics analysis method is adopted to study the theory foundation,the starting,the execution of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system.In the process of discussion,what is the essence of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in this article? How to reconcile?What is the conflict of interests among the subjects? What is the reality of China and how to improve it? Based on those idea and line of thinking,the goal pursued in this paper is how to maximize the role of law enforcement and reconciliation under the framework of the anti-monopoly law value target,and eliminate the impact of its drawbacks.This research on the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system has practical significance in theory and practice,and on the basis of thousands of people's research,there are some innovations in this research,which are embodied in: On the one hand,the research content of anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system is further deepened.Among the foreign research results,not many foreign research results in the relation between the settlement system and other law enforcement systems,which are the most core reconciliation contracts in the law enforcement of anti-monopoly law,the main system composition of the reconciliation system,and the relationship between the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system and other law enforcement systems.In our country,there is a lack of systematic and in-depth study on the definition of anti-monopoly law enforcement and reconciliation,the comparative study of anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system,the scope and conditions of reconciliation,the content of settlement decision,the change and its implementation of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system.Especially after the publication of the Guide,the contents of many previous studies have been specified and improved in the Guide.This article will be based on the background of the publication of the Guide,and will conduct in-depth research on the weak links and blank areas of the research,expand the research content of the anti-monopoly law enforcement system at home and abroad,and hope to draw scientific,reasonable and comprehensive understanding and conclusion through systematic research.On the other hand,this paper studies the basic theoretical categories of the anti-monopoly law enforcement andreconciliation system.This paper studies the value orientation,basic principles and basic theories of anti-monopoly law enforcement.Firstly,on the value orientation of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system,this paper puts forward the value orientation of the efficiency centralism.Namely the reconciliation system should take efficiency as the center and at the same time give consideration to the fairness;Secondly,this paper analyzes the mainstream view that the settlement procedure of antimonopoly law enforcement belongs to the informal procedure in nature,and puts forward the viewpoint of formal procedure;thirdly,this paper puts forward the idea that the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system will not reduce the deterrent degree of anti-monopoly law;Finally,the legislation and effective operation of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in China are studied deeply.The current the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in our country is only outlined the general outline.Generally speaking,the provisions of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in our country are too simple and not perfect.Therefore,after learning from the advanced experience and mature practices of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in Europe and the United States,this paper studies the problems existing in the legislation and operation of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in our country and then puts forward some suggestions to improve the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in our country.This paper attempts to make a comprehensive comparison between the legislative and practical development of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in the main developed countries and regions,and to put forward some suggestions for the construction and perfection of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in our country combining the economic and social development of our country.First of all,it is necessary to adhere to the value orientation of efficiency center in order to minimize the cost and maximize the efficiency of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system;Secondly,it is necessary to continuously improve the uniformity and accuracy of the rules at the legislative level,especially in terms of the scope of application of the case,which is one of the core factors for the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system to realize its value.At the same time,after acomprehensive consideration of the factors such as competition harm,industry characteristic,and market type and so on,on the basis of balancing the interests between law enforcement agencies and operators,the third party and the public interest,the discretionary power of law enforcement agencies should be restricted to a certain extent.Thirdly,on the level of law enforcement,it is necessary to strengthen the supervision of law enforcement organs to fulfill their commitments and further improve the legal liability system of operators.