Restrict The Identification And Regulation Of Transactional Administrative Monopoly

Chapter V of China's Anti-Monopoly Law stipulates administrative monopoly behaviors,and Article 32 of them stipulates limited transaction-type administrative monopoly.The administrative litigation cases and anti-monopoly law enforcement cases collected through the administrative monopoly regulations have the largest proportion and a large number of restricted transaction-type administrative monopoly cases,with high incidence and wide influence,and are the key regulatory administrative monopoly actions in China.Compared with economic monopolies,restricted transaction monopolies have the characteristic that the implementing subject is an administrative agency or an authorized agency with public power.Therefore,this type of monopolistic behavior is impartial and difficult to defy.Change,withdraw,or the court confirms illegal or withdraws through judicial procedures,otherwise it is difficult to change.While it is difficult for the market subject as a manager to contend with this type of monopolistic behavior,some operators realize the space for power rent-seeking and smoothly implement the market dominance or monopoly agreement conferred by administrative monopoly behavior,which also leads to restrictions.The biggest difference between transaction-based administrative monopoly behavior and other administrative monopoly behaviors is a mixed monopoly of administrative monopoly and economic monopoly.Regarding the phenomenon of monopoly chimerism,the general theory said that the administrative monopoly and economic monopoly should be regulated in a unified manner,that is,they should be regulated in accordance with the regulations after being investigated and punished.The author agrees with this theory,and the provisional regulations on administrative monopolies also do the same.Similar to chimeric monopoly,abstract administrative monopoly always appears together with transaction-limiting monopoly.Because restrictive transaction-type monopoly acts are always implemented in the form of published documents,Articles 32 and 37 of the Anti-Monopoly Law always appear together in the applicable laws of this type of monopoly case.But in essence,the logical relationship between Article 32 and Article 37 is the cooperation of laws and regulations,and the provisions of Article 32 should be applied.At the same time,most of the restricting actions in restricting monopoly cases are direct restricting,and the disguised restricting is manifested as the uncertainty of the restricting object,and the restricting of the scope replaces the restricting of the quantity,which adds confusion to the determination.Therefore,the judgment standard of the limiting effect should be increased in the determination.In addition to considering the formal expression of the limiting behavior in disguise,it is also necessary to consider whether the administrative behavior substantially harms the right of fair competition and consumers 'free choice.The discovery and resolution of the problems are all for better regulation and restriction of transactional monopoly behavior.In addition to the above-mentioned accurate determination of this type of monopolistic behavior and the integrated regulation of prominent monopolistic behavior,it is necessary to perfect the fair competition review system in the regulation,which can make up for the anti-administrative monopoly.There are only administrative litigation and law enforcement post-regulation measures defects.At the same time,the method of confirming and revoking the illegality of the monopoly in the administrative monopoly litigation regulation lacks effective regulatory effects.The standard for the determination of direct losses in administrative compensation is appropriately relaxed,and the damage to the market caused by the restricted monopoly is compensated for through administrative compensation.To enhance regulatory effects and deterrence.