On The Evidence In The Leniency Policy Of Antimonopoly Law

Horizontal agreement has its own features,which is united and stabilized.It will bring harm to the market competition and consumer rights and interests.Many countries in the world have strict penalties.In order to avoid this punishment,operators tend to take a high concealment method to hidden the monopoly agreement.Evade law enforcements agencies investigation and punishment,which makes it difficult to investigating.The most direct evidence to prove illegality about monopoly agreement is by written,which is the most difficult to find.Compared with the investigation,operator can take the initiative to report.It makes easier for the law enforcement agencies to get more effective evidence.If the evidence rules are not clear,the applicants will have doubts about the exemption criteria.It can affect implementation of the leniency program in a country,blocking the effective implementation of the leniency policy.On the contrary,refinement rules of evidence can tempt applicants to submit evidence of participation in the monopoly agreement which is illegal,so as to reduce the cost and the waste of resources in investigation,crack down more monopoly agreements and promoting the efficiency of anti-monopoly execution.It plays an important role in improving the efficiency of law enforcement agencies.In the relevant provisions of the evidence system of leniency policy,it can be divided into different content according to different situations.In Corporate Leniency Policy and Individual Leniency Policy,the evidence submitted in different time.In different stage of investigation and in marker system,applicants have to submit different standard of evidence to reduce or exempt its own responsibilities.The standard of evidence has related to applicants' follow-up cooperation.If the quality of the evidence is high,cooperation is become necessity of compulsory provisions.If the standard of evidence is not so high,relatively the law enforcement will pay more attention to the follow-up cooperation to get more valuable evidence.The quality of evidence and cooperation obligations are closely connected,it can be regarded as two part of the whole process.Whether submit evidence or actively cooperate,the ultimate goal is to identify and investigate monopoly agreements,and according to the final standard for this purpose,applicant will be exempted from liability.In addition,due to the civil damage compensation in the anti-monopoly law can't be exempted,it will brings a series of concerns to applicants,the most direct concern is the use of evidence materials in leniency program and the civil compensation litigation.Therefore,we should make confidentiality rules in civil compensation lawsuit for using evidence.In the United States and the European Union legislation,the relevant provisions of the leniency system have been through a process from obscure to clear,gradually satisfy the needs of law enforcement agencies to investigate and deal with cases of monopoly agreements.In China,leniency policy embodied in<Antitrust law of the People's Republic of China>and a series of departmental rules of State Administration for Industry and Commerce and National Development and Reform Commission.But these regulations is too principle and not clear enough,because of the low legal effect,these rules can't be used in everywhere.Compared with the mature legislation in developed countries,our legislation is in the initial stage,has not formed the perfect system of leniency policy.A series of monopoly agreements cases shows that the defects of legislation brings inconvenience into practice,so it is urgent to be consummated.We should pay attention to our local characteristics,distinguish the corresponding rules according to different circumstances.In order to play the value of leniency policy,we have to perfect legislation,make the construction of system able to adapt to the development of market economy in China,then the real value of the leniency policy can be realized.