top of page

Leniency Policy

in

Asian Competition Law

Conference

October 5 & 6, 2018

at Kyushu University, Japan

Conference conveners: Steven VAN UYTSEL & Mark FENWICK  

About

CONCEPT

In the rapidly growing Asian region, competition policies and laws have started to play a vital role in building the infrastructure for a market-based economy. Thailand and Indonesia have adopted a competition law in 1999. India followed in 2002. Singapore and Vietnam followed in 2004. China, Malaysia and Hong Kong introduced a competition law in 2007, 2010 and 2012 respectively. ASEAN Member States have committed themselves to introduce competition policies and laws by 2015 and actually did so (e.g. Philippines, Laos, and Brunei (Cambodia still finalizing the draft)). Japan, Korea and Taiwan, to the contrary, have a much longer history with competition policy and law. Japan was forced, by the Allied Powers, to adopt a competition policy and law in 1947. Korea enacted its competition law in 1980. Taiwan followed about a decade later and adopted its competition law in 1992.

 

Among these countries, China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, and Taiwan have also created leniency policies. Without doubt, this turn towards leniency policies is inspired by the claimed success of the leniency policies in the United States and the European Union. In the end, representatives of the enforcement agencies in these jurisdictions have been positive about this enforcement tool. For example, James Griffin praised leniency for leading to an increase in the number of cartel prosecutions and the amount of fines imposed in the United States. Philip Lowe, detailing the history of European cartel enforcement, indicated that the real change in enforcement came with the adoption of leniency.

 

Despite the positive tone in the enforcement agencies’ evaluations of their respective leniency policy, there is a growing body of scholarship questioning the positive evaluation. The positive evaluation is mainly based on enforcement data.[3] A sole focus on enforcement data may be misleading to address the effectiveness of leniency policies.[4] Such an evaluation, according to Maurice Stucke, does not address the individuals that engage in the cartels or that decide to apply for leniency.

 

Stucke is not alone in his critique. There is skepticism among other scholars writing on leniency policies. Daniel Sokol has identified strategic use of leniency in the United States. Andreas Stephan has criticized leniency applications in the EU for following an investigation into cartel activity by the US antitrust agency. Caron Beaton-Wells has meticulously described the interpretational complexity of the Australian leniency program and combined that with practitioners’ views on its operation, to conclude that leniency may not be the enforcement tool to exclusively rely on. Still another study has revealed the inability of a leniency policy to trigger a race to the enforcement agencies.

 

Against this background, the book aims to critically evaluate the leniency policies adopted in China, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, and Taiwan. Therefore, we are looking for contributions that detail the conceptualization of each of these countries’ leniency policy. The policies could be further analyzed by contrasting the conceptualization of these policies with what is considered the ‘best practices’ for leniency. This could be an evaluation based upon the best practices developed under the auspices of international or transnational organizations, such as the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and International Competition Network. Another framework could be the guidelines developed by UNCTAD in relation to leniency policies and developing countries.

 

​

Speakers

 SPEAKERS

baskaran_b_9016_edited.jpg

Baskaran Balasingham 

Macquarie University (Australia)

Lim_edited.png

Yong Lim

Seoul National University (Korea)

Karan_edited.png

Karan Singh Chandhiok

Chandhiok & Associates (India)

Ploykaew photo (2).jpg

Ploykaew Porananond 

Chiang Mai University (Thailand)

CV Photo (size reduced) andy.jpg

Andy C.M. Chen

Chung Yuan Christian University (Taiwan)

Yoshi_edited.png

Yoshiteru Uemura

Hannan University (Japan)

Scott_edited.png

Scott Clements 

Allen & Gledhill LLP (Singapore)

DSC_1015_edited.jpg

Steven Van Uytsel

Kyushu University (Japan)

004.jpg

Sandra Marco Colino

Chinese University of Hong Kong (Hong Kong)

Mark.jpg

Mark Williams

Melbourne University (Australia)

cassey.jpg

Cassey Lee

ISEAS Yushof Ishak Institute (Singapore)

Schedule

 Program

 Leniency Policies in Asian Competition Law

 

October 5, 2018

 

Session 1 – Chair: Mark Fenwick

 

10:00 – 10:10     Opening (Steven Van Uytsel)

10:10 – 10:40     Leniency Policies, their Evaluation and International Best Practices and Guidelines                                (Steven Van Uytsel)

10:40 – 11:00     The Development of the Leniency Programmes of the US Department of Justice and                             the European Commission (Baskaran Balasingham)

11:00 – 11:45     Discussion

 

12:00 – 13:30     Lunch (Italian Restaurant Itri Ito)

 

Session 2 – Chair: Steven Van Uytsel

 

13:30 – 14:50     Antitrust Leniency in China and Hong Kong: Two Laws, Two Systems (Mark Williams)

13:50 – 14:10     Hong Kong's Leniency Policy: A Critical Assessment (Sandra Marco Colino)

14:10 – 14:30     Leniency Program in Taiwan: Enforcement Experience, Effectiveness Assessments                               and Future Challenges (Andy Chen)

14:30 – 15:15     Discussion

 

15:15 – 15:40     Coffee Break

 

Session 3 – Chair: Ryu Kojima

 

15:40 – 16:00     Leniency in Singapore (Scott Clements)

16:00 – 16:20     The Leniency Programme in Malaysia’s Competition Regime: A Critical Evaluation                                 (Cassey Lee)

16:20 – 16:45     Discussion

 

2019 Conference on Algorithms – Steven Van Uytsel

 

16:45 ~               Introduction of the Conference on Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Algorithms                                       (November 21-23, 2019)

 

October 6, 2018

 

Session 4 – Chair: Kentaro Hirayama

​

10:00 – 10:20     Leniency in India (Karan Singh Chandhiok)

10:20 – 10:40     The Absence of Leniency Program in Thailand Competition Law (Ploykaew                                             Porananond)

10:40 – 11:05     Discussion

​

11:05 – 11:20     Coffee Break

​

11:20 – 11:40      Injecting a Dose of Competition into Leniency Policy: The Proposed Dual Leniency                                Program in Korea (Yong Lim)

11:40 – 12:00      Leniency in a Changed Competition Environment: But Should Japanese Companies                              Care? (Steven Van Uytsel and Yoshiteru Uemura)

12:00 – 12:30      Discussion

​

12:30 ~            Closing (Steven Van Uytsel)

​

13:00 ~               Lunch (Chinese Restaurant TenTen)

Info

Conference Venue & Contact

Kyushu University

Faculty of Law

​​Large Conference Room (5th floor)

East Building No. 2

744 Motooka, Nishiku

Fukuoka 819-0395

 

itolawbig2.jpg

Thanks! Message sent.

bottom of page