Research On The Reconciliation System Of Anti-monopoly Law Enforcement

In 2008,the Anti-monopoly Law was formally implemented,in which the operator commitment was established,which marks the formal establishment of the anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system in China.Establishing this system in the field of anti-monopoly law enforcement is of great significance to help law enforcement agencies quickly and effectively curb illegal acts,restore market economic order destroyed by illegal acts,save the cost of anti-monopoly law enforcement,and achieve efficient law enforcement by law enforcement agencies.However,although the undertaking of the operator in the Anti-monopoly Law sets up the basic framework of the reconciliation system of anti-monopoly law enforcement,the actual operation lacks specific and perfect norms and restrictions,such as the wide scope of application of the system,the lack of specific provisions on investigation degree,the single way of starting,the lack of consultation procedures,the lack of a third party and public interest protection mechanism,and the lack of supervision methods,etc.Problem.Therefore,it is necessary to standardize and refine the legislation in order to enhance its operability and to promote its institutional superiority to be effectively brought into play.Firstly,starting from the concept,characteristics and theoretical basis of the system,this paper makes a theoretical analysis of the system;secondly,through the analysis of the current laws and regulations and the provisions of the current anti-monopoly law enforcement reconciliation system,and combining with the actual application of the system by law enforcement agencies,it points out the deficiencies of the existing legislation and provisions;finally,in the evaluation and reference of the United States and Japan.On the basis of the anti-monopoly law enforcement and reconciliation system in EU and Taiwan,this paper puts forward some suggestions on how to improve the system and make its system superiority play its due role in terms of its scope of application,limitation of investigation,mode of initiation,negotiation procedure,protection mechanism of third party and public interest and ways of performing supervision.