Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 8th Aug 2009 09:55 UTC
Law and Order Earlier this year, the European Commission slammed Intel with a massive fine, penalising the chip maker for its anticompetitive practices. A report by the European Union's ombudsman has now criticised the EC for its conduct, as the EC did not perform proper record keeping, leading to the loss of some evidence. It won't turn the tide for Intel, but it does raise an important question: how fair are these EC antitrust proceedings?
Permalink for comment 377759
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE:
by dmantione on Sat 8th Aug 2009 21:17 UTC in reply to "RE: "
dmantione
Member since:
2005-07-06

What if you were the accused, and were facing a administrative process where the judge, executioner, and collector were one and the same person? Would you accept that?


This happens everytime I drive too fast. No court to defend myself, just an administrative sanction only. I can still go to court if I disagree with the fine. And I don't think I have much choice not accepting the system, this is how the system works.

Administrative enforcement happens everywhere in our society. In fact, the NMA in the Netherlands works the same way as the DG Competition. And think of the FIOD, the Keuringsdienst van Waren, the Autoriteit Financiƫle Markten, the OPTA, ... They all work outside the courts, and with all of them you can appeal their decisions.

It's perfectly normal what happens here, I don't think there is any civilized country where sanctions can only be imposed by courts, the legal system would get flooded by repetitive cases. As soon as the work becomes specialized or repetitive you will find a country will move the enforcement of that task outside the courts.

Edited 2009-08-08 21:19 UTC

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4