|
Empowering BCC without vital reform, |
Bangladesh Competition Commission (BCC) presses hard the govt to make amendment to the Competition Commission Act 2012 that will allow it to break into offices,servers of the companies not willing to share information. If the new amendment makes its way, the BCC will be able to search companies, seize documents and digital device of the companies [accused for] market malpractices and [being] noncooperative to BCC demands.
BCC remains inactive for quite some time while imperfections in various markets conspicuously observed in recent times. So far it has failed to implement the act that clearly spelt out its role in case of clear violation in creating a congenial atmosphere for a competitive market. This matter has been discussed by me at length in the piece titled "Wake Up BCC", published here on September 15,2026(see https://hoquestake.blogspot.com/2026/09/wake-up-bcc.html?m=1). Consumers were appalled to notice inaction from BCC's part when packed pilaf rice market went volatile, daily market witnessed price hike, less competition observed in the MFS market and energy division introduced a biased private sector fuel import and distribution policy. Existing competition law is enough to make corrective intervention and to hold a public audition. Yet that thing did not happen.
Dissemination of the news of its intervention and transcript/ live broadcast of its auditioning will send a convincing signal to the market and consumer. Instead it is reported that BCC seeks amendment to the law to break into a company and seize its documents.
This step is objectionable for couple of reasons. First, BCC must have capability and means to retrieve information from elsewhere when a company decides not to cooperate. BCC should have clear framework of agreements with other organizations like NBR, customs, utility companies, joint register of stock, market research firms,law firms and universities to get information on certain market and stakeholders of that market. If this happens, noncooperation of alleged company will not be a big deal.
Second, BCC is asking for role similar to NBR officials who can look into the matter of tax evasion by a company and get hold of its documents for further scrutiny. Though objectives of NBR and BCC are different, their roles are similar. It is needless to say that NBR data is more than enough to get things done for the BCC. Then why does allow BCC to perform similar role? There is a global trend that homogeneous organizations should function together. In this backdrop, Bangladesh merged Bangladesh Investment Development Authority (BIDA) and Bangladesh Export Processing Zone Authority (BEZA) into Invest Bangladesh to facilitate foreign direct investment. Since market share and market dominance reflected in tax return, VAT return and custom duties, it will be redundant and waste of taxpayers' money to assign similar NBR roles to BCC. What is needed is greater cooperation and coordination between two organizations and BCC's access to NBR data in times of need.
Third, BCC is mostly staffed by govt officials of various educational background. It appears that staffs like them may make BCC a police organization. And proposed amendment may turn it into a draconian organization as they swoop into a company's servers,documents in whimsical pretext, violating the company's business secrecy. For a company, its business secrets are vital to protect it from other competitors. If its vital [business] detail,monthly sales,forecast,technology used etc fall into wrong hands, then its business may incur serious losses. Interestingly, income tax act protects a taxpayer/entity by not allowing NBR or any other person disclosing his/its tax details into public domain unless the taxpayer is a public figure or the company belongs to a public figure. Income tax act also proposes punishment if there is any breach to the law. In contrast, the Competition Commission Act 2012 does not offer any protection to a company to safeguard its business secrets.
Fourth, integrity and professionalism of BCC staffs are important. Since we live in a corrupt environment, integrity and competency of the govt officials are always questioned. BCC will be well managed and headed by barristers or former judges who are well versed in company laws and dealt extensively with company disputes, chartered accountants, market researchers, investment bankers, economists and former NBR officials. It is interesting that govt is splitting the NBR into two departments --- a policy department led by NBR experts and a management department led by govt officials. It is being done so that policy making and implementation will be done by two distinct entities, reducing harassment of the taxpayers. This is not the case with the BCC, which is largely managed by govt officials and there is a lack of specialized workforce. Prevailing situation increases the likelihood of harassment of the companies if BCC manages to implement the proposed amendment to the Competition Commission Act.
The existing competition act has provided enough ammunitions to BCC to go after the market malpractitioners. Yet it remained dead silent in the time of crisis. It indicates BCC is not up to the task and it has yet to prove its mettle. In this backdrop, the proposed amendment will make BCC a draconian organization and an instrument of harassment. What is needed is greater coordination between BCC and other organizations. Laws and amendments are needed first to decide who will be eligible to manage and head BCC, ensure privacy and secrecy of the companies, split BCC into two distinct bodies like the NBR and hold accountable BCC officials in case of failure to comply with the law. Before addressing these issues, empowering BCC with the proposed amendment will hurt both the companies and consumers alike.
