Why it is time for a unified anti-monopoly agency

Can you explain your background to date?

I obtained a Bachelor of Laws at Peking University and obtained a Master of Laws as well as a Doctor of Laws at the University of International Business and Economics. After graduating from Peking University, I taught at the University of International Business and Economics for more than 28 years. In the mid-nineties, I went to the University of Connecticut for an academic visit. I was there for one year and during that time I became interested in antitrust law as it protects and maintains market economic order. I soon realised that it will not only play an important role in the modernisation of the legal system in China, but also will be an indispensable law for the country's future economic development. Since then, I have focused my research on anti-monopoly laws. I have participated in the expert panel discussions for legislative drafting or amending of several laws.

What are your thoughts on the development of China's Anti-monopoly Law (AML)?

Five years after the AML became effective, a comprehensive law system including more than 10 regulations has emerged, mainly in the form of laws, administrative regulations, rules, judicial interpretations and local legislation. The State Council has issued Provisions on the concentration of business operators and Guidelines on defining relevant markets. The National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) has issued two administrative rules, the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) has issued six administrative rules, the State Administration for Industry and Commerce (SAIC) has issued five administrative rules and the Supreme People's Court has issued a judicial interpretation, as well as legislation at local-levels. Generally speaking, the entire law system in respect of anti-monopoly is comparatively mature.

What are the biggest challenges during anti-monopoly reviews?

Detailed rules of the AML are mostly administrative. Their effect is minimal in the legislation hierarchy. Take MOFCOM as an example; in complex cases it could not clearly define some basic concepts like right of control, efficiency, equity joint-venture and time limit. Also, MOFCOM's review of a business operator concentration requires administrative permission and has to comply with the administrative procedure. A time limit for review of 180 days cannot ensure cases are evaluated sufficiently, because reviews often involve professional and complex knowledge. The serious lack of professional staff and the frequent mobility of personnel have also restricted the efficiency, quality and professionalism of anti-monopoly reviews.

The draft of the regulation on simplified procedures recently published for comments by MOFCOM has been formulated after summarising plenty of cases and taking foreign experience as a reference with a view to meeting market demand. It deserves praise for this move. Simplified procedures are helpful to reduce the burden of plenty of reviews borne by the limited administrative resource and to increase the efficiency of administrative review.