'Out to target CCP'

Your editorial of 18 October, 2009, under the above caption, came in the wake of commentaries pouring on policy signals with reference to Noble Prizes '09 in Economics to Elinor Ostrom and Oliver Williamson. Work of both the laureates has to do with developing countries and the less fortunate.
After announcement of the prize, Ostrom is quoted to have reiterated "work shows the importance of combining ideas from economics, political science, sociology and other fields in order to understand how the real world works". Professor Williamson has stated that confidence in the self-correcting role of the market can be misplaced. To protect the less fortunate is to save the economic system from collapse, he appears to believe.
According to the Noble Committee - commenting on the work of Williamson, "large corporations may, of course, abuse their power. They may, for instance, participate in undesirable political lobbying and exhibit anti-competitive behaviours".
THIS THROWS TO FORE THE FOLLOWING:
1. Economics and politics are intertwined. Some would even proclaim these as one.
2. The 'perfect market' approach is not relevant.
3. There have to be systems in place to protect the economic interests of the populace. These systems should go to ensure that the mighty do not use their power against large social interests. In line with the judiciary, media etc. Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) is an important arm of the society to provide safeguards against exploitation by the politically and economically powerful.
Being a relatively nascent institution, it needs to be nurtured - materially, logistically and ideologically. The government cannot be running with the hares and hunting with hounds. Technical knock outs against the CCP should give way to real justice. To this end, the penalties imposed by the CCP should materialise.
The CCP should not be made to run through the courts and consume energies in litigation. If necessary, to use the 'finance' phraseology, the government should buy CCP's receivables on account of penalties imposed, pay to the CCP what is due to it and fight court cases as it has appropriate logistics for the purpose vis a vis CCP.
Talking of ideology, CCP is there basically to put a check on exploitation. With its functioning details provided in the Ordinance, the Commission has to appreciate that to this end it is in place. Not only the CCP should attempt to discipline, it should also be disciplined. Statements like: 'the Government's or the Court's job is not to fix prices' it should stay away from.
It is for pillars of the society, just one of which is CCP, to bring justice, through doing away with exploitation. Nation's resources at governments' disposal, in terms of land and infra-structure of the country, are provided to the chosen for the welfare of the society, notwithstanding that from entrepreneurial point of view these are with 'profit motive' and some economists' belief that maximisation of profit is in the interests of everybody living in society.
Thus the state should have the authority to intervene when A delivers X (in terms of lower prices, higher taxes or higher output) but B is able to turn - X (higher prices, lower taxes and lesser output). Such an intervention by the state is also through fixing the same price for a commodity produced by different manufacturers.
The CCP has to be conscious that it is one of the institutions basically to do away with exploitation through putting a halt to cartelization etc. It is assigned a job which should be done. It is not for giving policy statements.