Research On The Settlement Procedure Of Antimonopoly Case

Setup of law enforcement institution of antimonopoly and its procedure of dealing with antimonopoly case, is not only the basic content of antimonopoly law, but also the critical basic task during the implement of antimonopoly law. Because whether the setup of law enforcement institution of dealing with antimonopoly case is scientific, and whether the concrete procedure of setting antimonopoly case is scientific, it will directly concerned with the effective implement of antimonopoly law. At present time, China has already established the aim of economic system reform that is to set up social ism market economic system, and what' s more, China has already entered WTO, and it requires that we must establish market that is allows of fair competition. The problem of monopoly and antimonopoly has become a hot issue that has incurred wide attentions. People are increasingly realizing the necessity and importance of instituting antimonopoly law in China.The aim of this essay is to draw on the experience of rewarding use for the setup of China' s antimonopoly law system and The Antimonopoly Law that is being drafted out by the review and a comparative analysis of American, Japanese and Ell' settlement procedures of antimonopoly case.According to the above-mentioned purposes, The author mainly used comparison method, induction method and case analysis method, made a deep review and analysis to the institution and enforcement of antimonopoly of America, Japan and EU, etc, drawing the following basic conclusion: namely, though the patterned varied in different countries, there still exist many similarities : (1) they all have set up special antimonopoly law enforcement institution, which can be classified into two types: Para judicial organs and pure administrative organs;(2)The antimonopoly law enforcement institutions have been set up as a special organization which have high social position , great power, capable setup, Specialized staff, high authority and independence, according to the basic principles such as efficiency principle, independence principle, authority principle, specialization principle, the combination principle of suiting national conditions and drawing on the experience from foreign countries. (3) The basic authority of antimonopoly law enforcement institution is: <1>it owns certain Para legislative power, and is entitled to lay down legislative rules and regulations which are concerned with how to put the framework of antimonopoly law. <2>it owns certain Para judicial powers, and is entitled to investigate, try and adjudicate various concrete antimonopoly cases. <3>it owns powerful legislative power, which mainly includes legislative compulsory measure power, examination and approval power, and legislative punishment power. (4) The basic procedures of dealing with antimonopoly cases mainly are legislative ones. The settlement of concrete procedure is largely identical but with minor differences. So, accordingto this, the author thinks that China should, under the same principles, set up a special antimonopoly law enforcement institution which is similar to Para judicial power, which also have the above-mentioned basic authorities, and the procedures of dealing with antimonopoly case also should mainly are legislative ones.