Asean Shikoku Anti-trust Comparative Study

Indonesia and Thailand respectively published their competition laws which are named《Prohibition of Monopolistic Practice and Unfair Business Competition Law》and《Trade Competition Act》in 1999. Vietnam and Singapore respectively issued their competition laws which are named《The Competition Law》and《Competition Act 2004》in 2004. Because of the similarities in geography, culture and many other aspects among these countries, it is possible to do the comparative study of the anti-monopoly legislation of these countries. The four countries are very similar in prescribing the objects of anti-monopoly law, including the prohibited restrictive agreement, the abusing of dominant position on the market and the economic concentration. Basing on the content of the objects, Singapore stipulate the content of both exclusion and exemption, Indonesia and Thailand only have the regulations of exclusion, and Vietnam just stipulates the exemption. In the aspect of the administration installment, there are two patterns among the four countries. They are single administration installment and parallel dualistic administration installment. Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand belong to the former and Vietnam belongs to the latter. There are also two modes in the installment of appeal organization. One of them is court-including appeal organization installment; another is executive institutions which take the responsibility of appealing. Indonesia, Singapore and Vietnam belong to the former, Thailand belongs to the latter. In the aspect of the punishment, the administrative measures concentrate on amerce, moreover the order to vary or stop the restrictive agreement practice, the order to divide or split the merged or consolidated enterprises or the order to resale the acquired enterprise parts and so on. As to the criminal sanctions, except Vietnam has no relative regulation, the other three countries commonly take fine and imprison measures. As to the compensation, all of the four countries state the complaint rights to the victim, and they all recognize the single-multiple compensation. In the aspect of the enforcement procedure, it mainly expounds the launching, investigation, determination and appeal procedure. The comparative conclusion is all the four countries follow administration-central doctrine, and the administrations play a major part in the case-handling procedure. At the same time, the enforcement procedures of the four countries' anti-monopoly laws greatly embody fair and efficiency which are the two values of anti-monopoly law. The experience of legislation and practice of the four countries' competition law make great sense to the enforcement and improvement of our《The Anti-monopoly Law》.