On economic reform and China's anti-monopoly law

Keywords: Economic reform, antitrust, Economic, constitutional, administrative monopoly

Summary: Anti-Monopoly Law as the maintenance of the socialist market Economic order and the order of competition of the basic legal system is a product of China's Economic reform, but also the deepening of China's Economic reform and promote Political reform catalyst of China's anti-monopoly legislation is based on economic reform as an opportunity, therefore, countries need to establish the legal system to protect competition, pArticularly the establishment of anti-trust Laws. anti-monopoly Law is a sign of China's economic reform Laws, because the promulgation and implementation of this Law shows that our economic system can be nature, indicating that the market mechanism in China's resources play a fundamental role because of the economic system transformation has not been fully completed, together with anti-monopoly law itself, there are many imperfections, the beginning of China's anti-monopoly law enforcement is facing severe challenges. China's economic system reform from the "market" direction from, and should adhere to the "market" the direction of the walking in the current administrative monopoly to become a huge obstacle to China's economic reform in the case, China should strive to break the monopoly of the executive, especially from the legal guarantee public ownership and private ownership, state-owned enterprises and private enterprises apply equally to anti-monopoly law.



With the economic system reform, China's legal system also made great achievements, pArticularly the establishment of a number of socialist market economic system to promote the legal system in civil, commercial, Economic Law area, China promulgated the Law, Contract Law , Property Law, enacted in 2007 the anti-monopoly law, which makes our country basically established a socialist market economic system, the three basic principles: freedom of contract, protection of ownership and freedom of competition. This paper discusses the anti-monopoly law and China's economic reform relationship the author's view is: anti-trust law for the maintenance of the socialist market economic order and the market competition order and the basic legal system, is a product of China's economic reform, and its promulgation and enforcement also is conducive to deepening China's economic reform and promote Political system. Anti-monopoly legislation in a variety of thoughts, ideas impact not only promote China's legal system, and promote China's culture of competition, but also China's economic reform is a major bright spot in a kaleidoscope.

First, China's anti-monopoly legislation to economic reform as an opportunity to

Anti-monopoly law is a basic market economy legal system, market economy country for hundreds of years of experience shows that market competition is very important, because only competition can stimulate people's wisdom and passion to mobilize the enthusiasm and creativity of enterprises, thus promoting the business Development and national economic progress. In this sense, the competition is the country's progress and economic Development, national prosperity and prosperity is indispensable for propulsion. Therefore, in order to establish a socialist market economic system, in order to enable the market mechanism at the national macro-allocation of resources under the control of a real play a fundamental role in our country should establish a competition to promote and protect against monopoly, against the legal system to restrict competition for the implementation of a planned economy of the country for decades, China's anti-monopoly legislation is the result of economic reform.

(A planned economic system to reflect the anti-competitive theory

China's planned economy, competition is not only not be seen as a means of regulating the production, the mechanism is to optimize the allocation of resources, encouraging innovation is the driving force, and "competition" word has been brought to the ideology of color, negative things, for example, in China in the 1980s book "Dictionary of Political Economy>> book, the" competition "as" in private ownership under the conditions of commodity producers struggle between competing economic interests "in the capital capitalist system, the "anarchy of production because of competition and the role of the law, social work and production can not be a reasonable arrangement and full use, resulting in a serious waste of social productive forces and destruction." "On the one hand, a large number of goods sold, reactor destroyed in a warehouse or broken on the other hand, millions of workers unemployed due to poverty. "The conclusion is: the planned economy is the best economic system," only in the production of information based on socialist public ownership conditions, the proportion of the national economy to a planned Development, competition and anarchy of production rules will lose the role. "[1] Today, in our view, the evaluation of the competition is not correct, at least one-sided and unfair, however, under the planned economy of the reason why people despise competition, will compete as a scourge, which is rooted in science and socialist society in the future founder of abstract analysis were simplistic and dogmatic understanding.

According to Marx and Engels's theory, competition is linked with the private ownership of production, and private ownership put the relationships between people separated, and placed the point against each other, therefore, Marx and Engels envisaged the future of communism should be a no product, no commodity production, no money, so there is no competitive society. Engels, in his <<Principles of Communism>> a paper on the new society, made the following description: "The first fundamental deprivation of competing individuals industrial and management of all production depArtments. all production depArtments will be to manage the whole community, ie, in the public interest in accordance with the general plan and all members of society to pArticipate in the business down so that competition will be the new social system eliminated, and replaced by the joint because of the inevitable consequences of individual management of industry is private ownership, because competition is just a private individual a way to manage industry, so private ownership with the industry's self-employment and competition are closely linked to. As a result, private ownership must be abolished, instead it is common to use all instruments of production and distribution of products according to mutual agreement, the so-called matrimonial property. "[2] In short, the future of the community because the elimination of private ownership, people's interests are not mutually antagonistic, but consistent, competitive and thus also eliminated.

The problem here is that Marx and Engels is a logical analysis of the future society, but later it puts the abstract logic of this analysis as the program can be implemented immediately, without considering the reality of the material conditions of socialist society and people the ideological level, thus making under socialist conditions of competition are not realistic assessment, such as Stalin's competitive capitalism and the socialist concept of race as incompatible: "the principle of competition is: the failure of some people and death, victory and others ruled. the principles of socialist competition are: to give those left behind who advanced to comradely help to achieve general improvement. competition: beat those left behind in order to establish their rule. socialist competition is: some people work well, others work well, and then there are some people work better, to catch up better in order to achieve general improvement. "[3] All in all, as many people imagine a socialist society and communist society there is no commodity production, no market and no competition idealized society, which after the victory of the October Revolution established a socialist state in theory and in practice, suffered a series of great challenges. In this regard, 1984 Third Plenum of the Chinese Communist Party adopted at the twelfth <<economic reform on the decision of the CPC Central Committee>> (hereinafter referred to as <<decide>> made a very good conclusion: "the founder of Marxism predicted that Socialism in the eradication of the system of exploitation based on, must be able to create higher labor productivity, the productivity at higher speeds forward. China's founding 35 years of profound changes, has begun to show the superiority of the socialist system. but it must be noted that this superiority has not been due to play. The reason for this addition to the historical, Political, ideological reasons, on economic terms, an important reason, is formed on the economy a socialist Development of productive forces is incompatible with the rigid model. "From the business side, the main drawbacks of this rigid model in the following areas:

First, the duties of government and enterprises, regardless of the state enterprise system too dead. Companies are not independent producers and operators, but as an integral part of the state organs or basic production unit, its task is specified by higher authority tasks to the national economy in a planned and proportionate Development, which, as <<decide>> pointed out: "As the needs of society are complex and often in flux, business conditions vary widely, complex economic ties between enterprises, any State agencies can not fully understand and adapt quickly to these situations, if the various companies owned directly by the state agency operations and management, it will inevitably have serious subjectivism and bureaucracy, depressed vigor and vitality of the enterprise . "

Second, the enterprise and the market completely separated, the law of value and role of market mechanism can not occur because the business principle, but in accordance with national plans for production, regardless of whether their products meet the needs of the community can be unified by the sale of state-owned commercial enterprises, production profit or loss borne by the national unity, neither the interests of the enterprise itself and no responsibility, and thus do not feel the external pressure from the market, which, as <<decide>> pointed out: "If divorced from the reality of the situation, attempting to various social all economic activities into the program, and relying solely on executive orders to implement them, ignoring the economic levers, and the important role of market regulation, it will inevitably cause the guiding ideology of the planned separation of subjective and objective, plan seriously out of line with reality. "

Third, the state enterprise to eat "iron rice bowl" of workers to eat enterprises "iron rice bowl", enterprises and workers in general lack of enthusiasm and initiative, lack of innovation, resulting in the planned economy of low productivity and shortage of widespread economic problems, which also, as < <decision>> pointed out: "Socialism with Chinese characteristics, the first should be sufficient vitality of the socialist enterprise, while the drawbacks of the current economic system, just focus on the performance of enterprises lack vitality."

(B) the competition is the vitality of the socialist market economic system

China's economic reform, as some countries do not adopt a "shock therapy", but take a gradual path of development, it is a real economic reform, the party's Third Plenum sounded the socialist horn of economic reform. Plenary Session <<bulletin>> pointed out: "four modernizations, require a significant increase productivity, will inevitably requires changes in many aspects with the development of productive forces suited to the production relations and the superstructure, not change everything way to adapt the law, activities and way of thinking, which is an extensive and profound revolution. "party's 12 largest proposed that China should establish a" planned economy supplemented by market regulation, "the economic system. This system Although not a market economy, but the market regulator has been included in China's economic reform target model. Third Plenary Session of the Party by twelve <<decision>> is the development of China's socialist market economy, a decisive step <<decide>> that : "the full development of commodity economy, is the insurmountable social and economic development stage, is to achieve the necessary conditions for China's economic modernization." planned economy to break through the opposition with the traditional concept of the commodity economy. the Party's Thirteenth National Congress expressly that "social ism in a planned commodity economy system, should be planned and market system of internal unity, "" plan, scope and role of the market are covered by the whole society, "generally speaking, the new economic mechanism should be" state regulation of market , the market leading enterprise. "party congress established the goal of China's economic reform is to establish a socialist market economic system," make the market in the socialist state's macro regulation and control of resources to play a fundamental role. "fourteen Third Plenary Session <<on the establishment of a socialist market economic system, the decision of a number of issues>> also on the basis of past experience and drew a socialist market economic system, the basic framework: adhere to public ownership, the common development of various economic sectors under the premise of the modern enterprise system, a unified national market system, a sound macro-economic control system, a reasonable social income distribution system and multi-level social security system in five parts constitute embodies the basic socialist system and market economy combination with the primary stage of Socialism in China distinctive features.

As China's economy has gradually changed from a planned economy to market economy, China is also from a serious lack of competition culture in the past, the country gradually began to promote and encourage competition in the market, for example, in the beginning of economic reform, some people will compete as a "scourge ", and the gusto. [4] after ten years of economic reform, especially after the 14th Party Congress in his report, the competition has been regarded as the optimal allocation of resources and coordination of production and demand fundamental mechanism congress The report stated: "We want to establish a socialist market economic system, is to make markets in the socialist state's macro regulation and control of resources to play a fundamental role in economic activities to follow the requirements of the law of value, to adapt to changes in supply and demand through price function of leverage and competition, better allocation of resources to benefit the link up, and the pressure and power to the enterprise in order to achieve the survival of the fittest, the use of various economic signals on the market more sensitive responses advantages, promote the coordination of production and demand in a timely manner. "This fully confirms the market mechanism, price mechanisms and competition, the market economy system, the basic category, but also fundamental aspects of the socialist market economy, certainly the price regulation and market competition is an instinctive socialist market economic order , which also affirmed the competition on China's economic reform and the establishment of socialist market economic system is important.

China's economic reform in practice is synchronized with the competition in the market place the one hand, the socialist market economy as a market economy, it must be linked with the competition, that is, to the use of competitive survival of the fittest mechanism, out of inefficient enterprises, eliminate unreasonable production processes and poor quality products, and promoting rational allocation of social resources, through the price mechanism to determine the production plan by enterprises and business plan to improve the supply and demand, to meet the needs of the market, and also to use this powerful incentive competition promote the technological transformation of enterprises and product updates, improve management, efforts to reduce production costs and prices, with minimal investment, to achieve the maximum output on the other hand, the promotion of competition for China's economic reform has a special significance. China economic reform is mainly done in two ways, namely, the establishment of a unified national market system, market mechanisms to achieve, but, in fact, the market competition is the market mechanism, competition rules is the rules of the market, the role of competition is the role of the market, so , no competition, no market, no market mechanism. The other is the reform of enterprises, namely the establishment of modern enterprise system, especially the conversion of large and medium state-owned enterprise management mechanism, the enterprise market, and enhance their vitality, but competition for the same invigorate enterprises have a decisive significance, because the vitality of enterprises is that they can in accordance with market needs, ongoing organizational changes, technological transformation and product updates. However, there is no market competition, companies have no power in accordance with market demand adjust and develop their own, do not innovate and improve management. As a result, there is no competition you can not invigorate enterprises, competition is an indispensable means to invigorate enterprises.

(Three of the socialist market economy need to protect competition

Competition as a mechanism for regulating the market, the lifeblood of the market economy, however, experience shows that market economies, the market itself does not have a mechanism to maintain fair and free competition. On the contrary, competition in the enterprise in order to reduce the pressure of competition and risk-averse, they always want to seek a monopoly by some means to limit competition on the market at this stage in our immature and under conditions of imperfect market mechanism to limit competition phenomenon is also frequent, such as price cartels, limiting the number of production, sales market segmentation, production and sales company jointly exclude competitors, some industry through joint or even the development of enterprise groups to set up a few companies monopolize the market situation. Of particular note , because in our country from a planned economy to a market economy transition period, the situation has not changed completely Zhengqibufen from government administrative power to restrict competition is still very strong, and, from the sphere of action and depth to see , administrative restrictions on competition than the much more serious economic restrictions of competition, thus becoming impede effective competition in our market model to establish the main crux of the problem. With economic reform, China's economic life has started to have competition, but because of the impact of all kinds of restrictions on competition, especially because the government's differential treatment of different enterprises and a high degree of economic segmentation, the result is that some poor and inefficient enterprises not eliminated, excellent and very efficient business. This race condition, if continued, will not only seriously affect the competitiveness of our enterprises, but also affect the country's economic development.

According to the experience of developed market economies, a prerequisite for effective competition in the market at least three, one open market, which companies can freely enter the market, participate in market competition, the second is independent of market players, that businesses are allowed to determine prices, determine the direction of investment, to develop their own business plan, the three rules of market competition, it is like sports, there is no rule can not match, no rules can not decide the outcome in the current, first and second conditions of realization of the need to continue our deepening of economic reform, because as long as the companies above as well as "mother", also belong to this department or that the government, they have a real difficult business decision-making power, but also to talk about the main competitive market as long as companies enter the market also will be resistance from various government, there is no real investment decisions, product or service price does not reflect the market supply and demand, and thus it is difficult to talking about open and competitive market environment, this third condition is State legislative task that requires the establishment of a standardized order of market competition in China's legal system, in particular the establishment and protection of competition against the monopoly of the legal system.

All in all, in order to establish and maintain the socialist market economic system, China's market in order to establish a free and fair competition, corporate legal environment, China needs to antitrust laws. Anti-monopoly law is abstract and generally reflect the laws of the market itself is market economy and the inherent requirements of instinct, but also the instinct of the socialist market economy and internal requirements. China needs to compete against monopoly and protect the legal system, indicating that the market economy is not a laissez-faire economy, but orderly economic system.

Second, the anti-monopoly law is a sign of China's economic reform laws

China anti-monopoly law enacted in 2007, although this to some extent a response to China's accession to the World Trade Organization commitments to the international community, but fundamentally, this is the response of China's 1978 economic reform began . that is, through 30 years of economic development and economic reform, China's planned economy under the conditions of price-fixing system has been broken, corporate ownership structure has achieved a diversified, state-owned enterprises have been more fully enjoy operational autonomy, and with the outside open-door policy, China's economy has been completely integrated into the international economy, the internationalization of China's market has in this case, our legal system should be modernized, especially should establish a protection against competition, monopoly and the legal system for the enterprise create a free and fair competitive environment. Therefore, the formulation and promulgation of anti-monopoly law marks the way our allocation of resources from the Government's executive order has been largely transformed into market mechanisms, China's economic system has been largely from a planned economy to market economy.

(A basic content of China's Antimonopoly Law and features

Antitrust economics is that if a company is a monopoly or dominant market position to obtain, it is bound to raise prices, reduce the supply on the market, so our anti-monopoly law is aimed at prevention and suppression of monopolistic behavior, to protect fair market competition, improve economic efficiency, protect consumer interests and public interests, promote the healthy development of socialist market economic order to achieve this goal, our anti-trust laws from other countries, particularly drawing on competition policy and competition law developed and regional experience in the substantive law areas: (1 prohibits monopoly agreements (Chapter II; (2 prohibits abuse of dominant market position (Chapter III; (3) centralized control of the operator (fourth chapter in addition to consideration for conditions, prohibit administrative restriction of competition (Chapter V. In addition to the substantive law, China's anti-monopoly law also provides law enforcement agencies (section 9,10 of the investigation procedures (Chapter VI Legal responsibility (Chapter VII).

And anti-trust laws of other countries or regions compared to the characteristics of China's first anti-monopoly law is clearly based on its national conditions, such as the provisions on administrative monopoly addition, the <<antitrust>> Article 4 The State has formulated and implementation of the socialist market economy with competition rules, strengthen and improve macro-control, a unified, open, competitive and orderly market system, which shows that our antitrust laws, although the purpose of protection against monopoly and competition, but must also national conditions, development and implementation of the anti-monopoly law and the socialist market economy. For this consideration, "antitrust>> Article 5, the operator can be fair competition, voluntary association, according to the implementation of centralized, expand the scale of operation and improve market competitiveness. Article 7, the dominant position of state-owned economy accounts for the relationship between the national economy and national security industry as well as exclusive monopoly of the industry according to law, the state of its legitimate business activities of the operator be protected, and the operator's business practices and the price of goods and services according to law, regulation and control, safeguard consumer interests, to promote technological progress of these provisions show that China's anti-monopoly law in the fight against abuse of market power harm the interests of consumers, while also encouraging national security and economic lifelines of the important industries and key areas of the state-owned enterprises bigger and stronger, improve their international competitiveness of these harmonization of competition policy and industrial policy provisions show that competition policy is important, but it is not a country CD an economic policy, especially in the current period of transition of China's economic system, our legislators really need to consider many issues. Therefore, the law reflects a number of legislative intent and even conflicting purposes is understandable. Antitrust is Economic Law, it must not just the economic aspects of legal means, but also a Political and legal weapons. People may ask such a question, that is, competition policy and industrial policy in a conflict situation, which policy should be given priority and this problem only by future anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies to answer and the answer depends to some extent, the anti-monopoly law enforcement agency status, authority and independence, but also on the country's economic development and the social environment.

China anti-monopoly law as a 21st century law that arise, it is conditional standing on the shoulders of others, so China's Antimonopoly Law The second feature is that it draws in many areas of competition policy experience of advanced countries and regions, especially the United States learn from the experience of law and European law. For example, Article 2 of the extraterritorial application of antitrust laws, ie, a setting of a price cartel in a foreign country or a M & A activity took place in a foreign country, if China's market have serious adverse effects of competition, China's Antimonopoly Law has jurisdiction over its view of serious harm and cartel concealment, China <<antitrust>> Article 46, paragraph 2, draw the United States antitrust law in the forgiveness policy to require operators to take the initiative to the anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies Report monopoly agreement and provides important evidence about the situation, the discretion to waiver penalties. This provision is conducive to demoralize the offender Union, to improve the efficiency of antitrust enforcement. China <<antitrust>> Article 45 of EU competition law reference commitment to a system whereby if the operators under investigation pledged to take concrete measures to eliminate the consequences of monopolistic behavior, such as anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies that accept the commitment to lift its restrictions on competition concerns can limit the acceptance of an undertaking as a solution to the problem of competition . China's anti-monopoly law also draws a lot of experience of German law, such as the exemption provisions of cartels, dominant market position of the identified factors and the inference of market dominance. learn from the world trend of anti-monopoly legislation, China's Antimonopoly Law and the 1993 years compared to the anti-unfair competition law, but also substantially increased the amount of administrative fines, the implementation of monopoly agreements and abuse of dominant market position at the offender's behavior on a business annual market sales of 10% of the fine, greatly improving the antitrust deterrence. These provisions not only explains our antitrust laws is a very modern, but also shows China's anti-monopoly law to be the promotion and protection of a market-oriented economic system.

(Two anti-monopoly law is China's "economic constitution"

Antitrust laws in the market economy has an extremely important position it in the United States known as the "Magna Carta of free enterprise", in Germany known as the "economic constitution", in Japan, known as "the core of Economic Law." Counter- monopolies in the market economy status is determined by the nature of the market economy, because economic conditions in the market, operators must take their product or service to market on the consumer acceptance test and evaluation, this process is the market competitive process, so it can be said, the market economy is the competitive economy, market economy is built on a competitive basis.

Anti-monopoly law in China depends on the status of China's economic system in the planned economy, the development and promulgation of anti-monopoly law is unthinkable in the socialist market economic system, because the market mechanisms and competition, the allocation of resources in China also play a fundamental role, is the fundamental means of developing the national economy, anti-monopoly law in our country has an extremely important role in China's economic constitution. antitrust laws is the economic constitution, which is not to say that the legal system in China made provision in the Constitution, but that the law can explain China's economic system, shows that China is based on market mechanisms to allocate resources in an economic order of the German jurist Mestre Shoemaker believes that Economic Law on national economic order law, the national economic order depends on people to develop their economic planning method in the centralized planned economy, enterprises do not have operational autonomy, the country's economic order is the national plan of Economic Law is the development, implementation and revision of national program legal. market economic order based on economic subjects independently develop its production and operation plans for the features, this program is distributed set of economic coordination through the market price, and market prices is through competition and free participation in the enterprise market transactions produced under conditions to protect competition in the market economic order is indispensable to the system is the core of economic law [5] Hayek also pointed out that the planned economy and market economy under the Economic Law of the difference between the two systems, he said, the planned economy system of economic law is the organic law, or authorized law, because these rules provided that: "Every person in a certain position of the organization is required by the command, each person to follow the rules depending on their position and purpose, which purpose is to in advance by the authority issuing the command specified. "[6] In contrast, the market economy system of economic laws reflect the laws of market economy," they apply to a person or event uncertain, they are applied does not depend on any common purpose, even individuals do not need to know the common purpose. "[7] Thus, the market economy is an orderly system of course, the other hand, anti-monopoly law in the market economy status is also important from the The antitrust and competition of the great features to protect the decision, because practice has shown that the vast majority of monopolies, including corporate monopoly and administrative monopoly is unreasonable phenomenon, but its essence is to limit the price mechanism to regulate the social production and optimize the allocation of resources function in the short term, lead to a monopoly product prices and lower quality, damage the interests of consumers, the long term, monopoly leads to inefficient production and national economic shortages, more importantly, the monopoly will contain a state and national competitive spirit , while the competitive spirit is the true driving force for national economic development.

In addition to the theoretical significance of anti-trust status of China's economic life depends on its impact. Antitrust laws are designed for the enterprise market behavior of a legal system, so there is no doubt that the promulgation and implementation of China's enterprises will have a direct and significant impact, which means that the market economy of enterprises even enjoy full autonomy, they have no right to restrict free competition in the market. antitrust laws prohibit companies to form a price alliance, joint limit or the number of market segmentation approach to eliminate or restrict competition and harm consumers' interests, does not allow companies to eliminate competition by means of mergers and acquisitions, leading to monopolistic market structures do not allow those who in various ways, such as intellectual property rights by virtue of state authority or achieved a dominant market position of companies abusing their market power, or prevent competitors free to exploit the consumer can be expected, with the promulgation of anti-monopoly law, China's enterprises will experience a greater degree of competition in the market stress, which also enterprises to continuously adapt to the market and is constantly improving their driving force, which will increase their production efficiency and market competitiveness.

In practice, the antitrust laws of the two companies may have a greater impact: one is the color with the administration of state-owned enterprises, the other is a proprietary, technical standards as a means of large multinational companies. <<Anti- Monopoly Law>> Article 5 provides that, in the relationship between the national economy and national security industry as well as exclusive monopoly of the industry according to law, the state-owned economy accounts for a dominant position on the legitimate rights and interests be protected, but also clear that these operators shall not use its dominant position or monopoly position franchise harm the interests of consumers of these large state-owned enterprises and other monopoly businesses in the market behavior will be of particular concern to China's Antimonopoly Law. Not only has the world's largest multinational corporations generally well-known brand, has a strong sales network and advertising, and more financial and technical aspects of our general business has a clear competitive advantage, some in China's market dominance has been made, or even monopoly. In order to avoid and reduce the monopoly of multinational companies in China market conditions, market share in order to avoid abuse of its dominant market power of multinational companies, our country needs a competition policy in this regard, the anti-monopoly law is the most important legal weapon. Of course, China's anti-monopoly law not only to curb the monopoly of foreign forces, but also the use of competition, survival of the fittest mechanism to achieve optimal allocation of resources, but because the big multinational corporations in China's market has a clear competitive advantage, and even achieved a dominant market position, China anti-monopoly law should pay special attention to these enterprises.

Because the ultimate goal of social production, social spending, anti-monopoly law undoubtedly has a major impact on the consumer. Antitrust laws in the interests of consumers is mainly reflected in the choice of the consumer goods and self-interest transactions, because monopolization and restraint of competition, market conditions, consumer choice of goods and services right is in fact limited by the fact, any provision of anti-monopoly law is to protect the interests of consumers, for example, provisions prohibiting cartels will help reduce product prices, expand consumer choice, the provisions of merger control can maintain market competitiveness, thus contributing to the protection of consumers the right to trade independently. antitrust provisions against abuse of dominant market position, also aims to stop abuse of these enterprises their market advantage, exploitation of consumers, which is a direct consumer protection law. 2007 draft anti-monopoly law comes during the NPC Standing Committee, Association of instant noodles come forward to organize the joint enterprise of the industry to raise product prices. a on the protection of consumers interests, not only in China's Antimonopoly Law Article 11 General Provisions, "trade associations shall strengthen self-discipline to guide the operators in the industry according to competition and maintain competition in the market order", also "monopoly agreements" chapter to specifically provides that "no organization of the industry trade association of operators engaged in monopolistic practices prohibited by this chapter." China's economic reform before and after the practice has shown that only competition can bring to consumers the lowest price, best quality and maximum material progress, the protection of competition against the monopoly and antitrust laws is a real consumer protection law.

With China's Antimonopoly Law prohibits the executive and authorized by law to administer public affairs functions of the organization shall not abuse their administrative power to eliminate or restrict competition, antitrust laws at all levels of government also have a significant impact, especially the law Chapter V detailed the abuse of administrative power to restrict competition in a variety of behaviors, including compulsory trading, regional blockade, regional bidding restrictions, limiting inter-regional investment, engaged in monopolistic behavior and force the abstract nature of administrative behavior, which helps improve our institutions and their staff at all levels of government antitrust sense, will help them clear right and wrong, to draw the boundaries between legal and illegal, but also helps reduce our administrative restriction of competition, of course, regrettable that, anti-monopoly law not to the jurisdiction of administrative monopoly over the anti-monopoly law enforcement agencies, which makes the face of administrative monopoly antitrust laws have no teeth a bit like a tiger, but the anti-monopoly law on administrative monopoly is still very important within the meaning of because it shows that our legislators firmly opposed to the administrative monopoly attitude that the whole country against administrative monopoly is the mainstream point of view, helping to nurture and develop the competition in our culture, in the long run will help promote China's economic reform and political reform, but also conducive to promoting China's government-enterprise separation.

(C) the anti-monopoly law and private law

On the status of anti-monopoly law in China, it is necessary to talk about the relationship between antitrust law and private law in the process of drafting anti-monopoly law, some civil and commercial law scholars worry that the anti-trust laws will affect the formulation and promulgation of the principle of freedom of contract of civil law和保护所有权制度.有人甚至认为,中国不需要反垄断法,因为合同法可以解决所有的问题.事实果真如此吗?非也！在这个地球上,任何一个市场经济国家的经济体制都是建立在竞争自由、所有权保护和合同自由三大支柱之上,而不是仅仅建立在所有权保护和合同自由两大支柱之上.这说明,反垄断法所保护的竞争自由不仅是国家配置资源的方式和手段,从而可被视为一种外在的东西,而且也是市场经济的基本原则,或者说,市场经济的内涵、本质和属性,从而也是一种内在的东西.

Links to free download http://www.hi138.com

首先谈谈反垄断法与私人所有权保护.私人所有权制度是市场经济国家的基本制度.如果没有保护私人所有权制度,如果国家可以随意没收私人财产,如果一个人的财产可以随意遭他人抢劫,那么任何人都不会去创造财富,国家和社会就不会得到发展.也就是说,市场经济体制保护私人所有权是出于两个目的,一个减少人们以暴力和欺诈手段剥夺他人财产的欲望,另一个是激励人们的生产经营活动,激励人们创造更多的社会财富.然而,市场经济国家对私人所有权的保护不是绝对的.如果一种所有权会导致长期的垄断性经营,并由此导致社会经济效益低下,这种所有权就不应当得到保护.例如,美国历史上拆散过很多垄断企业.美国法院1982年对电信垄断企业AT&T的判决中,强迫该企业向竞争者开放电信网络,这实际就是对私人所有权的限制.[8]1997年美国政府诉微软公司一案中,美国地方法院也考虑过拆散微软.德国梅斯特梅克教授曾指出反垄断法对私人所有权的重要意义.他说,私人所有权制度不足以建立市场经济体制,因为私人所有权可以随着市场的变化,特别是随着市场竞争效力的变化,不断地改变其功能.而在这方面,反垄断法就是避免私人所有权导致经济和社会不良状态的重要手段. [9]

反垄断法不仅是对私人所有权的一种限制,目的是保障这种制度对市场经济能够发挥积极的影响,而且也是对合同自由原则的一种限制,以保障这种自由能够对市场经济发挥积极的影响.同私人所有权制度一样,合同自由也是市场经济的一个基本原则.因为在没有合同自由的条件下,人们不能自由地与他人进行交易,不能自由地从事生产经营活动,这样的社会肯定不能满足人们的消费需求.计划经济体制下的经济之所以被称为短缺经济,几乎所有的产品都不能满足市场的需要,其根本原因就是生产者没有经营自主权,没有合同自由.为此,我国<<合同法>>第4条规定:"当事人依法享有自愿订立合同的权利,任何单位和个人不得非法干预."然而需要指出的是,尽管合同自由是市场经济制度的一个基本原则,但是如果市场上没有保护竞争的制度,市场上没有竞争,合同自由是不可能实现的.例如,在消费者面对垄断企业或者面对霸王条款的情况下,他们是不可能享受合同自由的,合同自由必须得以市场竞争为保障.再举例说,我国<<宪法>>第16条规定国有企业在法律规定的范围内有权自主经营.然而,要保障企业的自主经营权,前提条件是保障企业的竞争自由.如果我国到处是地方割据、地区封锁以及其他各种限制竞争,企业的经营自主权或者合同自由就是空话.其实,我国经济体制改革30年的历程,就是我国经济生活不断打破垄断的过程.我国很多企业没有真正的经营自主权,根本原因也是我国经济存在着形形色色的垄断,特别是行政垄断.从这个意义上说,打破垄断,反对限制竞争,就是我国社会主义市场经济体制下经济自由包括合同自由的保障.其实,世界上没有绝对的事情,也没有绝对的自由.比如,言论自由是一般宪法规定的基本权利,但事实上,任何言论自由都会受到一般法律的限制,如保护青少年以及保护人格尊严的法律规定.与此相似,市场经济条件下的合同自由同样会受到限制.反垄断法禁止限制竞争的行为,特别是禁止竞争者之间订立卡特尔,禁止严重限制竞争的企业并购,禁止占市场支配地位企业的滥用行为,这是因为这些限制会损害竞争,损害消费者的利益,因此它们不能适用合同自由原则.反垄断法规范市场秩序,规范企业市场竞争行为,并通过禁止性的规定为企业的合同行为划定了一个可以发展的范围.

简言之,合同自由、所有权保护和竞争自由作为市场经济体制的三大支柱以及这种经济制度下市场主体应当享有的权利,它们相互不是独立的,而且也都不是绝对的权利.人们通常感兴趣的问题只是:为了建立和维护一个合理的经济制度,人们应当享受什么样的合同自由、所有权保护和竞争自由.因此,我们可以毫无疑问地说,反垄断法所保护的竞争不仅是国家配置资源的手段,而且也是市场经济的本质、内涵和根本属性.

三、反垄断法是深化我国经济体制改革的推进器

经过十多年争论,我国反垄断法终于在2007年8月30日经第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第二十九次会议获得通过,并于2008年8月1日起施行.尽管反垄断法已经开始实施,但我国绝大多数人对这部法律的有效实施信心不足,这是因为这部法律能否真正成为一个打破垄断和保护公平自由竞争的法律武器,还取决于很多因素,包括经济体制改革、政治体制改革、相关配套制度、竞争文化,当然更取决于我国决策者推动市场经济体制和竞争政策的决心.但可以肯定的一点是,因为反垄断法的任务是反垄断,保护竞争,随着这部法律的实施和反垄断观念逐步深入人心,我国经济体制将进一步市场化,我国配置资源的方式将进一步以市场为导向.

(一我国反垄断执法当前面临的挑战

反垄断法虽然能够对国家经济生活和几乎所有经济部门产生重要影响,对企业的市场行为和消费者产生重要影响,是一部规范国家经济秩序和市场秩序的基本法律制度,但因我国经济体制转型任务尚未彻底完成,特别是政府和企业的职能尚未彻底分开,加上反垄断法本身存在这样那样的不完善之处,可以预见,我国反垄断初期执法会遇到严峻的挑战.

我国反垄断法执法首先面临的一个挑战是,我国尚未建立一个统一和独立的反垄断行政执法机构,即我国反垄断法处于由国家商务部、国家发展改革委员会和国家工商局三家机构分头执法的局面.多家机构分头执法毫无疑问会影响反垄断法的效力和权威.虽然按照国务院法制办的解释,我国建立国务院反垄断委员会就是为反垄断执法机构今后的调整和变化留有余地,但在统一反垄断执法机构建立之前,多家执法机构之间不可避免地存在管辖权的冲突或执法工作中的摩擦,特别是国家工商局和发展改革委员会之间的管辖权很难明确划分,这是影响我国反垄断法有效执行的一个大问题.

我国反垄断执法还面临法律本身不完善的问题.如该法第55条规定:"经营者滥用知识产权,排除、限制竞争的行为,适用本法."但是,何谓滥用知识产权排除、限制竞争的行为?这就需要法律解释.因为我国反垄断法的规定非常原则,垄断协议、滥用市场支配地位以及控制经营者集中等各方面的很多条款都需要释义性配套法规,可以想见,国务院反垄断委员会和反垄断法执法机构在立法方面任重而道远.我国反垄断法的颁布不是我国反垄断立法的结束,而是刚刚走完的第一步.

除了上述问题,我国反垄断执法还面临行政垄断的问题.行政垄断在我国主要表现为行业垄断和地区垄断.行业垄断主要表现为某些行业集行政管理权和生产经营权于一体的特权企业,它们往往凭借政府的授权,有着一般企业不可能具有的竞争优势,在生产、销售以及原材料采购等方面处于人为的垄断地位.这种现象也被称为"权力经商".如国务院办公厅转发经贸委等8部门1999年第38号文件规定,除了中石化和中石油外,其他企业一概不得从事成品油的批发业务.在国务院办公厅转发经贸委等5部门的2001年第72号文件中,中石化和中石油又被授予石油产品零售的专营权.地区垄断也称为地方保护主义.如有的县政府为阻止外地化肥流入本地,在发布的地方性文件中规定:"为了保护本县化肥生产,禁止任何单位和个人(包括供销合作社系统从外地购进化肥,违者除没收商品和非法所得外,还要按有关法规予以重处,并追究乡镇人民政府和管理部门主要领导的行政和经济责任."[10]上述限制竞争有些是出于个别企业的利益,有些是出于地方的利益,但它们的本质是一样的,即偏爱个别企业,排斥其他企业,或者偏爱个别地区,排斥其他地区,对市场经济条件下本来有着平等地位的市场主体实施不平等的待遇.行政垄断的后果是保护落后,妨碍市场的自由、公平竞争,妨碍建立统一、开放、竞争、有序的大市场,导致"优"不能胜,"劣"不能汰,社会资源不能得到合理和有效的配置.而且,因为行政垄断是"官商勾结",为某些官员以权谋私和权钱交易提供了机会,从而也会引发腐败,损害政府的形象.因此,反行政垄断是我国反垄断法一项重要任务.

然而,令人遗憾的是,尽管<<反垄断法>>第8条明确规定:"行政机关和法律、法规授权的具有管理公共事务的职能的组织不得滥用行政权力,排除、限制竞争."反垄断法第五章还较详细地列举了滥用行政权力排除、限制竞争的表现,包括强制交易,妨碍商品在地区间自由流通,排斥或限制外地企业参与本地招投标活动,排斥或限制外地资金流入本地市场,强制经营者从事垄断行为,制定排除、限制竞争的行政法规,但却没有把行政垄断的管辖权交给反垄断执法机构.但是<<反垄断法>>第51条规定:"行政机关和法律、法规授权的具有管理公共事务职能的组织滥用行政权力,实施排除、限制竞争行为的,由上级机关责令改正."这就使反垄断法面对行政垄断像一只没有牙齿的老虎.笔者认为,出于下列原因,反行政垄断的任务不能依靠政府上级机关:第一,行政性限制竞争本质上都是歧视行为,目的是保护地方企业或者个别国有企业的利益,这就使政府上级机关在其下级机关与非国有企业或者与来自其他地区企业之间的争议中,很难保持中立态度.第二,这里的"上级机关"不是专门的机关,也不是特定机关,这些机关工作人员一般没有反垄断意识,不可能对其下级机关的限制竞争进行有效的监督和检查.不可否认,反行政垄断在其他国家也是一项艰难任务,因为这是在限制政府权力.反行政垄断在我国尤其是一项艰难任务,因为这不仅需要深化经济体制改革,而且需要政治体制改革.但无论如何,在行政垄断普遍存在的社会环境下,在国有企业可以寻求政府"保护"或者可以通过政府"寻租"的情况下,反垄断法很难得到有效执行.

(二行业垄断是我国市场公平自由竞争的最大障碍

经济体制改革30年来,尽管我国经济发展取得了举世瞩目的巨大成就,但计划经济体制下的"权力寻租"特别是行业垄断问题没有得到有效解决.据2008年调查数据,我国石油民营批发企业663家已经倒闭2/3,民营加油站45064座已经倒闭1/3,亏损企业达1万多家.有些民营石油企业在中石油、中石化两大巨头断油的困境中与俄罗斯的石油公司签订了购油合同,但是由于我国进口原油的垄断权属于中石油和中石化,这些民营企业在进口原油的交易中困难重重.[11]中石油和中石化垄断我国石油产品市场的后果有目共睹.有学者指出,我国垄断性原油进口和国家对垄断企业的巨额补贴,这一方面导致垄断企业可不计成本地从国际市场采购原油或者产品油,进而直接对政府形成调价的压力,另一方面国家的财政补贴也加强了石油行业的垄断性,抬高了我国石油产品的价格.[12]

据学者们的独立研究,我国权力寻租的"租金"约占GDP总额20％~30%,总金额高达4万~5万亿元.[13]"权力寻租"的受益者当然是社会上的强势群体,当前主要是国有大垄断企业,如电力企业的抄表工一天抄4次电表可以领取10万年薪.收入严重不公的现象也反映在金融、证券、保险、石油等其他国有垄断行业以及电信、铁路等被视为"自然垄断"的行业.人们感到忧虑的是,国有垄断企业凭借其垄断地位所获的垄断利润无止尽地不断扩大,国有企业很大程度上失去其传统上为人民服务的良好形象,成为在社会上享受特殊利益的特殊群体.一方面,有人甚至担心,一些以国有经济为基本形态的垄断大企业已成为我国社会两极分化的经济基础,担心这些大企业因在政府部门有代言人,"权力寻租"问题难以得到解决.[14]但另一方面,因为社会主义市场经济是以公有制为基础,有人认为"国有经济负有帮助政府调控经济"的任务,是"保证社会正义和公平的经济基础",认为我国不应减少国有经济在国民经济中的比重,而是应当扩大这个比重,不应减少国有企业的数目,而是应当提高这个数目,并提出"同样是中央掌握的大型国有企业,为什么私有化的俄罗斯保留的是社会主义中国的好多倍"的问题.[15]

其实,世界各国实践经验已经表明,国有经济和私人经济的比例虽不能说明国家的经济体制,如法国和德国的国有经济比例有很大不同但都属市场经济,但是如果国有经济在国民经济中的比例过大,这肯定对国家经济体制产生质的影响.因为在生产资料全部或者基本掌握在国家手中的情况下,政府代表国家是经济的绝对统治者,企业不可能真正享有自主权,它们的生产经营活动不过是完成国家经济计划的方式和手段.这种情况下,国家配置资源的方式就是国家计划或者政府行政命令,而不是价格机制、竞争机制等市场机制,这种经济体制也不可能是市场经济,而是计划经济.这个分析同样适用于具体行业或者具体部门.即当一个行业或者部门的生产资料基本掌握在国家手中的时候,尽管法律上有尊重企业经营自主权的规定,但因政府代表国家履行出资人的职责,包括选派或者任免企业领导层,这些企业的生产经营决策权在一定程度上就掌握在政府手中,即企业生产经营活动受制于政府,而不是取决于市场需求.以我国电信业为例.在中国联通、中国电信、中国网通等开展竞争的情况下,如果国资委代表国家作为这些企业的出资人,对企业领导层随意相互调动,或以推动国有资产合理流动为由要求它们相互合并,这些企业能够相互竞争吗?因此,当一个行业或者部门国有经济的比例过大,大到控制这个行业或者部门的情况下,这个行业或者部门就难以引入竞争机制.正是因为国有经济部门事实上不存在竞争,很多国家的反垄断法过去都有对电信、电力、邮政、银行等垄断性行业的豁免规定.这些豁免一方面基于行业的自然垄断或者国家垄断属性,另一方面基于国家的所有权制度.

20世纪80年代以来,随着东西方冷战的结束,特别是随着私有化和减少政府行政干预成为世界各国经济政策的主流,这些行业逐步引入了民营经济,降低了垄断性.特别是那些从计划经济转向市场经济体制的国家,无一不是将产权制度的改革作为解决中央集权经济的重要手段.有些国家如波兰甚至明确将反垄断与经济私有化联系在一起.这说明,要在垄断性行业引入竞争机制,除了改革国有企业,一个非常重要的手段就是放宽非公有制经济的市场准入限制.国务院于2005年2月也发布了<<关于鼓励支持和引导个体私营等非公有制经济发展的若干意见>>,提出要贯彻平等准入、公平待遇的原则,允许非公有资本进入电力、电信、铁路、民航、石油以及金融服务等行业,并提出要加大对非公有制经济的财税金融支持,完善对它们的社会服务等措施.然而,根据非公经济论坛2006年调查报告,我国2/3以上的民企认为,我国垄断行业的改革尚未见效,1/3以上的民企认为没有享受国民待遇.这说明,行业垄断是当前制约我国民营经济发展和制约我国经济体制改革的重要因素.笔者认为,允许民营经济进入垄断行业对国家经济发展至少有以下好处:

第一,有利于提高企业的竞争力.为了提高国有企业的竞争力,人们曾提出过各种各样的政策性建议,如兼并、重组、股份制、债转股、抓大放小、搞活搞死等.但从根本上和长远的眼光看,提高企业竞争力的根本出路在于引入市场竞争机制.经济学最基本的原理是,只有在市场竞争压力下,企业才会努力降低产品价格,改善质量,不断开发新技术、新产品、新工艺,改善经营管理.事实上,市场竞争就是企业不断磨练自己和不断适应市场的过程.这从企业的角度看,是提高了效率和市场竞争力,从社会的角度看,是优化配置了资源.任何人都不可否认,在提高国有企业的竞争力方面,民营企业的市场准入能够起到非常重要的作用.

第二,改善国家财政.国内外实践表明,任何国家对国有垄断企业都存在补贴的情况.亏损的多补一点,盈利的少补一点.不管是明补还是暗补,补贴全部来自国家财政.我国对国有企业更是普遍存在各种形式的补贴.打破垄断和放宽非公有制经济的市场准入限制,不仅可以减少国家对国有企业的财政补贴,而且随着私人投资进入国家垄断经营的经济领域,还会大大减少国家对这些部门的投资.这样,国家一方面减少补贴和投资,另一方面增加税收,国家财政状况自然会得到改善.

第三,改善国家宏观调控.打破垄断可以提高国有企业的生产效率,降低价格,增加产出,这从长远看有利于改善国家宏观调控.例如,即便打破垄断会出现失业问题,但随着新的经营者进入市场,还可以为社会创造新的就业机会.

把社会主义简单看成是公有制的观点是不正确的.邓小平说过:"空讲社会主义不行,人民不相信."[16]他还认为,贫穷不是社会主义,少数人致富不是社会主义,"一大二公"也不是社会主义,只有在解放生产力、发展生产力、消灭剥削、消灭两极分化基础上的人民共同富裕才是社会主义.所以,邓小平给社会主义下的一个精辟定义是:"解放生产力,发展生产力,消灭剥削,消灭两极分化,最终达到共同富裕."[17]因为行业垄断在我国明显不利于解放生产力,不利于发展生产力,而且在一定程度上成为我国社会两极分化的一个经济原因,我们没有理由维护个别企业在这些垄断行业的垄断地位,更没有理由加强它们的垄断地位.

(三反垄断法是打破行业垄断的法律武器

尽管我国反垄断法对滥用行政权力限制竞争包括行业垄断的行为作出了禁止性规定,但由于下列原因,这些规定在打破行政垄断方面只能发挥有限作用:

第一,一个国家是否将一种行为视为滥用,在于这个国家的反垄断意识.如果国家认为,推动建立大企业是提高国家竞争力的唯一手段,它就可能通过行政手段将一个行业的企业联合起来组建本国的"航空母舰".在这种政策的引导下,政府强迫企业加入企业集团虽然可能严重损害竞争,但因为这些企业并购是国家鼓励的,它们就可能被视为合法并且从反垄断法中得到豁免.如我国<<反垄断法>>第28条规定,经营者集中具有或者可能具有排除、限制竞争效果的,国务院反垄断执法机构应作出禁止经营者集中的决定,但经营者能够证明该集中符合社会公共利益的,反垄断执法机构可以作出对集中作出不予禁止的决定.考虑到<<反垄断法>>第7条对关系国民经济命脉、国家安全以及实行专营专卖行业的经营者国家予以保护的特殊规定,这些行业的经营者集中就可能易于通过"社会公共利益"的条款而得到反垄断法的豁免.

第二,界定一个行为是否构成滥用,还取决于国家其他法律制度以及竞争政策之外的其他经济政策.每个国家都有很多目的不同的法律和经济政策,它们会不同程度或不同范围地影响国家的竞争政策和竞争法.如很多国家对某些被视为自然垄断的行业仍然实行国家管制的政策,或对某些行业实行优惠的产业政策,或者实行保护国内市场的政策,或者实行过度保护知识产权的政策,等等.这些制度或者政策因为不是专门保护竞争,它们就可能与竞争政策和竞争法产生冲突.我国<<反垄断法>>第4条规定:"国家制定和实施与社会主义市场经济相适应的竞争规则,完善宏观调控,健全统一、开放、竞争、有序的市场体系."这条规定给反垄断执法机构留下了很大的空间,给了它们很大的自由裁量权,同时也为它们提供了适用国家产业政策的可能性.

笔者要强调的是,尽管竞争政策不是国家唯一的经济政策,尽管反垄断法在制止行政垄断方面的作用是有限的,但任何一个实行市场经济体制的国家都必须高度重视行政垄断问题.这一方面是因为市场竞争机制与政府行政手段相比是配置资源更好的方式,另一方面,政府限制竞争对市场竞争影响的程度、范围会大大超过企业的限制竞争行为.这正如古典经济学派指出的,无论过去、现在还是将来,政府的限制竞争都是对竞争危害最甚的行为.正是出于行政性限制竞争的考虑,很多反垄断法明确规定了不同所有制企业公平竞争的原则.如德国<<反对限制竞争法>>第130条明确规定,除中央银行外,该法适用于全部财产权或者部分财产权属国家所有的企业以及由国家管理和经营的企业.为了维护共同体大市场的竞争秩序,<<欧共体条约>>第86条第1款还对国家授予特权或者专有权的企业作出了限制性或禁止性的规定.据此,欧共体尽管在原则上不禁止成员国出于普遍经济利益的需要向国有企业授予特权或者专有权,[18]但这些授权不得违反<<欧共体条约>>中关于商品和服务自由流动的原则,特别是不得违反条约中的竞争规则.根据欧共体法,因国家授权取得特权或者垄断权的企业不得滥用其垄断地位,特别是不得将垄断权随意扩大到其他领域,如以拒绝交易的方式阻碍竞争者进入与其产品或者服务相关的上游或者下游市场.欧共体法院1993年对Corbeau一案的判决就是这方面一个著名案例.Corbeau是法国一家提供特快专递服务的私人企业,因为它提供的特快专递服务比国家邮政的服务更快、更有效,而且还能提供特殊服务,如允许客户变更其邮递地址,它被国家邮政视为不可容忍的竞争对手.这种情况下,国家邮政便阻挠Corbeau的业务,并以损害了自己的专有权为名对Corbeau提起了诉讼.欧共体法院的判决指出,尽管国家邮政提供具有普遍公共利益的基本邮政服务,但Corbeau提供的是国家邮政没有能力提供的服务,且这些服务不损害国家邮政所提供基本服务的经济稳定性.因此,国家邮政妨碍Corbeau向社会提供服务的做法是不合理地扩大其垄断权,违反了欧共体竞争法. [19]欧共体委员会竞争总局前局长埃伦曼指出:"欧洲法院的判决表明,除绝对必要的情况,任何导致限制竞争的专有权都应予以禁止.无论电信、邮政还是能源服务,它们的专有权只是基于服务的非盈利性和公共利益.成员国授予它们专有权或者维护专有权也只能出于公共利益,即在合理、公正和无歧视的条件下向社会提供普遍服务或者提供公共网络的必要性."[20]国有企业基于公共利益的服务在这里是指,一个交易不管经济上是否有利,它们都得与对方进行交易,如国家邮政规定全国统一的价格,而不考虑发信人和收信人之间的距离.因此,国有企业具有公共利益性质的服务也具有国民收入再分配的功能.

为保证竞争政策在国家各项经济政策中的优先地位,有些反垄断法还授权反垄断执法机构向政府部门提供有关市场竞争的咨询意见.匈牙利1996年修订后的<<禁止不正当的和限制性市场行为法>>规定,所有涉及或者影响市场竞争(特别如限制经营、限制进入市场、保护专有权或者影响价格或者销售条件的法律、法规草案必须征求竞争局的意见.[21]俄罗斯1995年<<关于竞争和在商品市场中限制垄断活动的法律>>第12条规定,俄联邦反垄断执法机构不仅有权向联邦行政权力机构、联邦各部门的行政权力机构和市政当局提出取消专有权、取消配额等各种建议,而且有权对这些机构发布禁令,制止它们违反反垄断法的行为或者撤销、变更它们与反垄断法相抵触的合同.波兰2000年12月修订的<<竞争与消费者权益保护法>>依据欧共体竞争法,还授权竞争主管机关监督国家补贴的情况.据此,国家补贴某些服务或者某些产品的生产而扭曲市场竞争,这些补贴得被视为违法行为.与欧盟法相一致,波兰竞争法中的国家补贴是广义的,包括国家财政补贴、无息贷款、国家担保以及国家以优惠条件提供商品或者服务等.根据这个法律,仅当国家补贴是出于自然灾害或者例外的情况,它们方可得到反垄断法的豁免.[22]

四、结 束语

我国经济体制改革从"市场化"方向而来,它也应当坚持朝"市场化"方向走下去.在当前行政垄断成为我国经济体制改革巨大障碍的情况下,我国应当通过各种措施来打破行政垄断,特别是应当从法律上保证公有制与私有制、国有企业与私人企业处于平等地位,保证国家对不同所有制的企业一视同仁和适用相同的竞争规则.所以,反垄断法在反对行政垄断中大有可为.当然,反对行政垄断不是一部反垄断法能够奏效的.在这个方面,我国还需要深化经济体制改革,进一步转变政府的职能,改革行政法,加强对行政权力的规范和监督.但这些改革需要法律先行,法律不仅可以维护现有的秩序和制度,而且还能够推动建立新的秩序和新的制度.随着我国经济体制改革的进一步深入,随着政治体制改革和政企进一步分离,随着非公有制经济能够自由进入越来越多的行业,我国企业将在竞争中进一步提高竞争力,我国消费者将在竞争中享受更低的价格、更好的质量和更大的物质进步,我们的国家也必将在世界竞争中从经济大国变为经济强国.





Notes:
[1]许涤新主编:<<政治经济学辞典>>上册,人民出版社1980年版,第597-599页.

[2]<<马克思恩格斯选集>>第1卷,人民出版社1972年版,第219、 220页.

[3]<<斯大林全集>>第12卷,人民出版社1956年版,第99页.

[4]如金名俊指出,在社会主义公有制基础上的商品经济中提倡竞争有以下三大危害:第一是给社会生产带来无政府状态,从而使国民经济的比例失调,第二是会腐蚀党组织、干部和职工的思想,败坏社会风气,第三是会从根本上改变国家与企业、企业与企业的社会主义关系.参见金名俊:<<竞争不适用于社会主义经济>>,<<学术月刊>>1979年第7期.

[5]、[6]、[7][德]E. J．梅斯特梅克:<<经济法>>,<<比较法研究>>1994年第1期.

[8]C. Christian von Weizsaecker, Wettbewerb in Netzen, WuW 7 u. 8/ 1997, S. 576 ff.

[9]参见王晓晔主编:<<反垄断法与市场经济>>,法律出版社1998年版,第3页.

[10]李必达:<<中国的反不正当竞争、反垄断行政执法>>,<<中国反垄断法国际研讨会>>论文1997年12月.

[11]钟晶晶:<<民营企业欲诉两石油巨头垄断>>,<<新京报>>2008年10月13日.

[12]张锐:<<谁在抬高中国石油价格>>,<<中国经济时报>>2008年8月15日.

[13]张剑荆:<<市场化改革:从哪里来,到哪里去?—专访著名经济学家、国务院发展研究中心研究员吴敬琏>>,<<中国经济时报>>2008年9月1日.

[14]邓万民、杨尧忠:<<消除两极分化的有效手段—停止对社会资源的垄断性侵占>>,<<社会科学报>>2007年8月9日.

[15]参见刘国光:<<十七大重申坚持和完善基本经济制度的意义>>,<<中国经济时报>>2007年12月13日.

[16]<<邓小平文选>>第二卷,人民出版社1993年版,第314页.

[17]同上书,第373页.

[18]根据欧共体法院判例,提供普遍经济利益的企业应满足以下条件:(1提供的服务属人们基本生活需求,如供应电力或者传递邮件等,(2基本服务在一定地域提供,(3基本服务得按人们能够承受的价格或者其他条件提供,如电力供应应保证24小时需求.提供普遍服务的企业不以盈利为目的,发生亏损可从国家税收中得到补贴.见V. Emmerich, Kartellrecht, in:Dauses ( Hrsg. , Handbuch des EU-Wirtschaftsrechts, Bd II, Rdnr. 155.

[19]EuGH 19.5.1993, Slg. 1993 12553, 2569 "Corbeau".

[20]转引自Ray Rees, Competition Policy and Public Enterprise in the European Community, in: Aad van Mourik: Developments in European Competition Policy, p. 63.

[21]Hungary, www.oeed.org/dateoecd/32/27/2404607.pdf.

[22]htto://naiz.pl/index/?id=43baa6762fa8lbb43b39c62553b2970d.

Links to free download http://www.hi138.com