2.1 Deterrence
(1) To open opportunities for the business sector to
participate in law enforcement
THE ORIGINAL ACT
It is the authority of the Trade Competition Commission to issue
any subordinate legislation, regulations, and orders.
THE REVISED ACT
The Trade Competition Commission has to be open to
stakeholders’ opinions before the implementation.
-Entrepreneurs get informed and prepared. As well
as the opportunity to provide feedback to clarify the rules that will determine
beneficial to administer the competition and virtually unenforceable.
-The entrepreneurs acknowledge the opportunity and
are prepared to give suggestions so the rules and orders to be implemented would not
benefit the supervision of the competition and that the Act will be enforced.
(2) The request to receive the advance adjudication of
practices
THE ORIGINAL ACT
The entrepreneur is unable to request the Trade Competition
Commission to perform advance adjudication
THE REVISED ACT
The entrepreneur is entitled to request to the advance
official adjudication from the Trade Competition Commission (The adjudication which
is related only to the evidence given to the Office)
The entrepreneur is entitled to inquire about the
Office should there be any cases that their practice is suspected to be
illegal.
(3) The result of adjudication for the illegal practice has to
be publicized to the public
THE ORIGINAL ACT
Not regulated
THE REVISED ACT
The Trade Competition Commission has to publicize the
result of the adjudication to the public and report to the Cabinet.
*The entrepreneur may learn from the illegal
practice and receive punishment so to be aware and refrain from the repetitive
malpractice.
(4) To give opinions on the Government or state agency’s policy
that obstructs the free and fair competition
THE ORIGINAL ACT
Not regulated
THE REVISED ACT
The Trade Competition Commission can give opinions or
suggestions regarding the policy and administration of the Government that may be an
obstacle for the fair and free competition of the entrepreneur.
2.2 The Suppression
(1) The Legal Punishment
THE ORIGINAL ACT
Every malpractice bears the same offense which is to derive
criminal penalty: “3 years of imprisonment, fine not exceed 6 million baht or to be
punished by both imprisonment and fine”.
THE REVISED ACT
• The legal punishment for the violation of law depends
on the degree of crime for both the administrative penalty and the criminal penalty.
The punishment will be in accordance with the principle of punishment for business
units.
• In the case of criminal penalty, the Office of Trade
Competition Commission is empowered to compare the fine and set the remedial
mechanism for the victim.
Comparison of Punishment Table
THE ORIGINAL ACT
Practice
- Power in the market: On the Dominance Position
- Hardcore Cartel
- Others Cartel
- Unfair Trade Practices
- Mergers and Acquisitions
3 years of imprisonment, fine does not exceed 6
million baht or to be punished by both imprisonment and fine
THE REVISED ACT
Practice
- Power in the market: On the Dominance Position
- Hardcore Cartel
2 years of imprisonment
Criminal fine does not exceed 10% of the income of the year that the crime is
committed (The Commission is authorized to compare the fine).
Practice
- Others Cartel
- Unfair Trade Practices
An administrative fine does not exceed 10% of the income
of the year that the crime is committed.
Practice
- Mergers and Acquisitions
To join businesses without seeking permission: criminal
fine for 0.05% of the value of the joint business.
To join businesses without notifying the Office: criminal fine.
(2) To enhance the effectiveness of the investigation
protocol
THE ORIGINAL ACT
A police officer or prosecutor in the subcommittee of the
investigation must only be government officers.
THE REVISED ACT
A police officer or prosecutor in the subcommittee of
the investigation can be government officers or used to be government officers
retired, resigned or transferred to another unit)
• It is approved to select the persons who are
resourceful and have sufficient time to execute the job efficiently.
(3) The authorization for the Intellectual Property and
International Trade Court to proceed the case with criminal penalty
THE ORIGINAL ACT
The Criminal Court is authorized to proceed with cases with a
criminal penalty.
THE REVISED ACT
The Intellectual Property and International Trade Court
is authorized to proceed with cases with a criminal penalty as they are experts on
economic.
(4) To enhance the effectiveness and procedures to restrain the
violated practices or the suggesting violated practices by elevating the penalty from criminal
penalty to the administrative penalty.
THE ORIGINAL ACT
• In the case of the violation of the Trade Competition
Commission’s order. It is stated to retrieve criminal penalties with 1-3 years of
imprisonment, 2-6 million baht fine and daily fine charged in the amount of 50,000
Thai Baht until the practice is terminated. The court will be the entity to proceed
with such the case.
• In the case of violation or violation-prone, the judge is
the ruler. Therefore, the entrepreneur remains indifferent.
• In the case of violation of the Office of the Trade
Competition Commission’s order and the court proved innocent, the culprit may
encounter the imprisonment penalty due to the breach of the order of the Office of
the Trade Competition Commission.
THE REVISED ACT
• In the case of the violation of the Trade Competition Commission’s order. It is stated to retrieve administrative penalty with fine not exceeding 6 million baht and daily fine charged in the amount of 300,00 Thai Baht until the practice is terminated.
• If the order is observed, the penalty will not be charged.
• If the order of the Trade Competition Commission is breached, the Office itself is authorized to charge with punishment throughout the time the violation committed.
• If the order is not observed and the fine is not paid on the administrative term, the Office is entitled to sue the case with the Administrative Court to seize the assets and sell by auction to get the money to pay the fine.
