Proposed competition measures seeks to protect small enterprises

"Proposed competition measure seeks to protect small enterprises"
by Ritchelle Alburo, PHILEXPORT News and Features
Originally published in the Philippine Exporters Confederation, Inc.'s site here.

"6. Proposed competition measure seeks to protect small enterprises

A recent proposed legislative measure on competition responds to a glaring need to address unfair competitive practices to the disadvantage of micro, small and medium-scale enterprises.

While protection of consumers from unreasonable pricing has been the rationale for the enactment of many of the country’s competition-related laws, Senate Resolution No. 123 of Senator Manny Villar seeks to operationalize fair market principles and discourage monopolies to allow MSMEs to participate in the growth of the economy.

Atty. Lorna Patajo-Kapunan of Capunan Lotilla Garcia & Castillo Law Offices was very pleased with said bill.

I would like to thank Senator Villar for recognizing the need to protect the MSMEs, said Kapunan, during a forum on Understanding Anti-trust held yesterday at the Philippine Senate, mentioning that many of the country’s small enterprises are disadvantaged by the restrictive agreements and arrangements of giant companies.

These restrictive agreements, as cited by Anthony Abad of Trade Advisory Services during said forum, include price-fixing, collusive tendering, market or customer allocation, sales or production restraints, concerted refusal to purchase or to supply and collective denial of access to an arrangement or association that is crucial to competition.

Aside from SB No. 123, there are four other proposed measures on competition in the Senate. These are SB No. 1 authored by Senator Ponce Enrile, SB No. 175 of Senator Anthony Trillanes IV, SB No. 123 of Senator Sergio Osmena III, and SB No. 1838 of Senator Mirriam Santiago.

Many of these bills seek to respond to the need to codify existing competition laws and come up with a comprehensive competition law that is workable and effectively deters anti-competitive practices.

Kapunan noted that Senate Bill No.1 of Senator Ponce “defines with particularity prohibited acts constituting monopolization and cartelization”.

By increasing the penalty for violation of Article 186 of the Revised Penal Code, Kapunan likewise intimated that SB No. 1838 will serve to deter the anti-competitive measures.

SB No. 1838 seeks to increase the number of years of imprisonment from the current six months to six years and the fine from P200 to 1,000,000.

To effectively enforce a competition law and achieve its desired outcome, Atty. Geronimo Sy of the Department of Justice laid emphasis on the need to fine-tune the evidentiary architecture of competition bills, citing that despite sectoral regulation of basic commodities, such as sugar, tobacco and rice, prices of the same remain prohibitively high, due mainly to the difficulty in providing sufficient evidence demonstrating violation of competition-related laws. -- Ritchelle Alburo, PHILEXPORT News and Features"

Enrile backs anti-trust forum

"Enrile backs anti-trust forum"
Original article published in Malaya, 02 March 2011, NATIONAL & METRO NEWS, p. B3

Click on image to enlarge and view full article.

Anti-trust bills timely

"Anti-trust bills timely"
by Willie S. Baun
Originally published in People's Journal, 01 February 2011, STREETLIGHTS, p. 4

"Multinational companies, particularly those dealing in "fast-moving goods," have enjoyed an array of privileges that otherwise would not be available to them, not even in their own countries.

What makes the FMCGs so profitable in the domestic market, apart from the usual bias for the "imported," is the participation of local distributors.

Numerous small enterprises take on the difficult job of bringing the FMCGs to the buying public, and set their profit margins based on standard retail prices and bulk-discount costs.

In effect the MNC plays commissary that merely takes care of administrative matters but somehow gets the lion's share of the income earned by the distributors.

'In and of itself,' observed a trade official, 'this is already a rather one-sided business deal.' It was added when flagrantly abused by a giant MNC to the graver prejudice of the distributors - the alarm bells should ring against anti-trust.

Two distributors in particular claim to have fallen under the mercy of one such MNC due to its alleged predatory pricing in direct conflict with the corporate codes enforced by the Department of Trade and Industry.

As this case wider currency in business circles, so has "Anti-Trust" attained buzzword standing. Soon enough, I believe, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago would be asked to include FMCG distributors and other such outsource companies in appropriate bills they have proposed.

Legal proceedings between the MNC and the distributors showed the multi-national may have perjured. That, moreover, the MNC's counter-affidavits and joint counter-affidavits versus the predatory pricing charge are inconsistent with one another and with the facts of the matter at bar.

When their attention was reportedly called, the MNC executives seemed unmindful of the resulting perjury charges. 'Their rebuttals were at best amusing, and, at worst dismissive. Yeah, as in 'we didn't know or realize we were lying!''

They also posited that 'privilege' and 'right' were synonymous and took issue with the distributors for the focusing on semantics. Cited in the MNC's defense, the Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary defined 'privilege' as a 'right, immunity, or exemption only by a person beyond the advantages of the most.'

On the other hand, Black's Law Dictionary, the authority on legal terms and legal definitions, indicates 'privilege' as a 'particular and peculiar benefit or advantage enjoyed by a person, company, class, beyond the common advantages of other citizens.'

Common sense, of course, tells us that a right is inherent while a privilege is bestowed. Then again, there's no guarantee that common sense is precisely what it says it is.

In any case, here's Mr. Webster just once more; Anti-trust, adj., Pertaining to the regulation of or opposition to trusts, cartels, pools, monopolies, and other organizations and practices in restraint of trade.

So there, Jose, and trust JPE and Miriam to get it right all the way."

In BusinessWorld

Published in BusinessWorld, 01 March 2011, BULLETINS, page 6/S2

(Click on image to enlarge)

Senate anti-trust forum provides key trade insights

Senate anti-trust forum provides key trade insights

Metrofile, The Daily Tribune, 27 February 2011

"02/27/2011

Senators from the committee on trade and commerce invited noted experts from a variety of fields to share valuable insights on existing anti-trust practices in the country. According to Sen. Manny Villar, the need for such a forum cannot be overstated. “We need to cover all the bases by conducting public hearings and hosting a series of lectures, so we may all understand the intent of the law and its benefits,” he pointed out. The proposed anti-trust law seeks to penalize unfair trade and anti-competitive practices in restraint of trade, unfair competition and abuse of dominant power. Consequently, it intends to encourage competition in the market place, which will help reduce prices and increase the quality of products and services. “Our committee is dead-set on passing the bill,” Villar further noted. The senators listened to the resource speakers who provided key inputs that are expected to make the final version of the law more effective. Among them were Undersecretary Zenaida Maglaya of the Department of Trade and Industry, lawyer Anthony Abad from the Ateneo Center for International Economic Law, and prominent lawyer and consumer advocate Lorna Patajo-Kapunan. After her presentation, a number of local distributors of a multinational corporation (MNC) from the audience approached Kapunan and the senators who were in attendance. It was learned later on that these distributors were driven to bankruptcy by what they deemed to be grossly unfair practices of this MNC. “This is precisely why we need carefully-worded and well-crafted legislation,” Kapunan said in response. “Our current laws not only allow our local businessmen to be bullied and exploited, but the level of leniency actually encourages it,” she emphasized. The committee is also tackling related bills on anti-trust legislation, namely, the Competition Act of 2010, co-authored by Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and Senators Ralph Recto and Antonio Trillanes IV, Senate Bill 123, authored by Sen. Sergio Osmeña III, Senate Bill 1838 filed by Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, and Senate Proposed Resolution 123 urging inquiry into cartels and monopolies sponsored by Villar."

Original article appears on Tribune Online here.

More anti-trust buzz

Click on image to enlarge and to read full article.
Originally published in People's Journal, 27 February 2011.

Senators at anti-trust public forum

Image source: Philippine Senate official website/ PRIB Photo by Albert Calvelo/ 10 February 2011

"ANTI-TRUST FORUM: Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, together with Sen. Manny Villar, chair of the committee on Trade and Commerce, attend the second day of “Understanding Anti-Trust”, a forum presented by the Committees on Trade and Commerce, Economic Affairs and the Special Oversight Committee on Economic Affairs. Also in photo is Senate Deputy Secretary for Legislation, Atty. Edwin B. Bellen. (PRIB Photo by Albert Calvelo/10 Feb 2011) "
(Original photo release with text appears here).

*Resource speakers for the Senate anti-trust public forum were Usec Zenaida Malaya of the Department of Trade and Industry, Atty. Anthony Abad, and Atty. Lorna Patajo-Kapunan.