The Research On The Comparison Of Administrative Law-enforcement Agencies Of The Antitrust Law Of China And Australia

In now days，the major countries of the world largely through the administrativelaw-enforcement agencies to implement the anti-monopoly laws. Relatively speaking,it cost less,and is more lfexible efficient. China’s setting of anti-monopolyadministrative law-enforcement is the Anti-monopoly bureau of the Minstry ofCommerce supervise the mergers and acquistions, the Price Supervision andInspection and Antitrust Bureau of the Development and Reform Commissionadminister price monopoly, the Antimonopoly and Anti-unfair CompetitionEnforcement Bureau of the State Administration for Industry and Commerceadminister the abuse of market dominance, monopoly agreement and administrativemonopolistic behaviors except for the price monopoly. There are also many specialindustry regulatory agencies to administer the monopoly behaviors in those specialindustry ifelds. Australia’s anti-monopoly administrative law-enforcement agencies isthe Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).It is responsible forsurvey and inspection of a variety of monopolistic behavior, and approval the mergersand acquisitions. As to the punishment of monopolistic behavior except mergers andacquisitions，the ACCC will sue to federal court and the federal court decides thepunishment.After comparing and analysing the administrative law-enforcement ofanti-monopoly in the two countries, and looking to the mainstream of anti-monopolyenforcement experience in world range. We can see the lack of authority, power andprofessionalize in China’s anti-monopoly administrative law-enforcement agencies. Inthe view of judicial territory and judicial power,there are multi-jurisdiction and thepowers and responsibilities of the agencies are in chaos.There are legislative conceptsand law enforcement practices reasons for these problems, so this set of thelaw-enforcement system is a compromise arrangement in our country right now. Thereis a certain degree of rationality, but there are a lot of room for improvement. Thefuture of our country’s anti-monopoly administrative enforcement should moveforward to the direction of specialization professionalization and independence, withgreat authority. It also needs restriction of the procedure and irghts itself. We candistribute all the administrative enforcement rights to the Anti-Monopoly Committeeof the State Council which was enforced by three agencies mentioned above. The committee becomes the only administrative law-enforcement agent, whilestrengthening the judicial supervision and decentralization.