Powerful lobbies are, reportedly, embarked upon limiting the powers of the Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) to undertake its core functions of inspection/search, and drastically reduce penalties which would have implications on the entity's financial independence, according to Chairman Khalid Mirza.
During the last two years in particular, the CCP had been engaged in a number of well publicised cases against cartels considered to be one of the major causes of rising prices due to what was widely perceived as either due to price fixing agreements or through restriction of output or directing distributional channels. Allegations of powerful pressure groups supporting cartels were rendered credible by former Finance Minister Shaukat Tarin publicly acknowledging this fact in the case of the sugar industry.
It must be recalled that last year when the CCP Ordinance was about to lapse there was a concerted effort to defang the CCP. It is significant to note that there was unanimity among all political parties on the need to curtail the powers of the CCP during a parliamentary debate on the revision of the proposed draft of the CCP Ordinance last year when it was about to lapse. However, after media pressure the Ordinance was re-promulgated in December but is due to lapse again on 26 March this year.
In addition, the tenure of Khalid Mirza, the Chairman of CCP, will also end in July this year, since he would be reaching statutory retirement age in a tenure post. If the debate thus far on the bill is a guide for amendments being proposed then the CCP would become an ineffective regulator just like its predecessor organisation - Monopoly Commission of Pakistan. It is conceded that these amendments are the prerogative of the parliament, however, it is the government party which constitutes a majority. It is their duty to ensure the passage of the bill as proposed by the government.
Mirza has noted two major issues facing the Commission today which need careful consideration. First is the decision, allowing right of appeal against a CCP decision with the High Court instead of the Supreme Court as was in the original Act. This change, he maintains, would cause a delay in the corrective process and take the bite away from the act and therefore remove the fear of punishment, which is essential for quick and speedy enforcement.
It would also allow litigants, he fears, to level false allegations against the CCP of harassment of businessmen with a view to challenging the right of entry by the Commission's inspectors for inspection purposes. There is, however, a more weighty argument against Mirza's claim, ie, that appeal to the Supreme Court is normally on point of law and not on facts. And, other regulators do fall under the writ of high courts.
More importantly, financial independence alone would enable the CCP to take decisions in the public interest without any interference from powerful lobbies. The suggestion that the CCP be given a percentage share in the fees charged by other regulators is being resisted by these other regulators.
There is, therefore, a need to empower the Commission to increase penalties and not reduce them in an effort to ensure its independence. Be that as it may, democratically elected government must accept the dictum followed by governments operating within democracies: "Of the people, by the people and for the people".
To date there has been inadequate emphasis on 'for the people' or such is the perception reflected by the fact that the public regards the government as having supported the cartels, particularly the sugar cartel, rather than serve the interests of the public last year. This would have political implications in the long run and one would hope that the government keeps this in mind prior to taking decisions with respect to revising the existing CCP ordinance.