Why should corporations spend time and money in developing compliance programs when their efforts don't count with the regulators? Are compliance programs worthwhile irregardless? Given such incidents as the diverse approaches of U.S. regulators over Honeywell, different attitudes of Member State authorities and DG Comp, and compliance advice published by global regulators, these questions have become noteworthy. Danny Sokol and Joe Murphy have helped organize a special two-part issue to explore these questions in depth. Last week we presented views from the corporate arena; this week we'll present articles from regulators and others.
And, while a bit apart from the main topic, we bring regulatory emphasis on punishment back to basics with a special article asking, Are Rights Finally Becoming Fundamental?
While it is clear that companies are under an obligation to comply with the rules, they are largely free to decide how to go about their compliance efforts. Ingrid Breit, Jeroen Capiau, Andrew Essilfie (DG Comp)
Successfully creating a compliance culture can help businesses avoid the severe consequences of infringing competition law prohibitions. Steven Preece (OFT)
Without advocacy and outreach, enforcement alone cannot positively ensure competitive markets. (Competition Commission of Singapore)
Pleading compliance programs as a mitigating factor in an enforcement action is not clear cut in Australia. Bill Dee (Compliance and Complaints Advisory Service)
Competition enforcement agencies have been sending stronger and stronger messages to potential offenders for years. But is anyone receiving them? If they are, do they care? Jeremy West (OECD)
A list of â€œbest practicesâ€ that can contribute to the efficiency of antitrust compliance programmes is laid out in the current framework-document. (AutoritÃ© de la Concurrence)
The EUâ€™s forthcoming direct accession to the ECHR gives the ECtHR and the EU courts the perfect opportunity to find that competition law proceedings must fully respect the fair trial rights and presumption of innocence. Kristina Nordlander & Patrick Harrison (Sidley Austin)
The CPI Antitrust Chronicle is published online, semi-monthly. It contains cutting-edge commentary on current global antitrust and competition policy issues.
Managing Editor: Lauren Chiang
Senior Editor: Lindsay W. McSweeney
Social Media: Anna Tzanaki
Subscription Manager: Susan Roberts
Office Manager: Kristen Adrian
Editorial Advisory Board:
Rosa Abrantes-Metz, Global Econ. Group, Stern School of Bus. at NYU
Kent Bernard, Fordham School of Law
Rachel Brandenburger, Washington D.C.
Adrian Emch, Hogan Lovells
Kyriakos Fountoukakos, Herbert Smith
Jay Himes, Labaton Sucharow
James Killick, White & Case
Stephen Kinsella, Sidley Austin
Ioannis Lianos, University College London
Elisa Mariscal, Federal Competition Commission, Mexico
Robert O'Donoghue, Brick Court Chambers
Aaron Panner, Kellogg, Huber, Hansen
Nicolas Petit, University of Lìege
Daniel Sokol, University of Florida Levin School of Law
Joshua Wright, George Mason Law School