摘要
《反垄断法》的有效实施需要政府主导的监管措施,社会经济活动的专业化使得由专业行政监管机关行使管辖权是最直接和最有效的,恰如"3Q大战"中工业和信息化部的监管活动。欧盟与美国对"行政限制"的规制经验,需要结合我国的历史传统和公有制实践。行政主体与经济主体之间并无截然的界限和实质区别,政府和任何公共团体均可依法从事经济或"民"、"商"事活动,或者以其行政权力帮助、扶持、强制企业限制竞争,客观需要将政府自身的反竞争行为与其它主体的反竞争行为平等地适用于《反垄断法》,如此政府的角色定位方能合理暨合法。
The efficient implementation of Anti - Monopoly Law of PRC （AML） needs social and e- conomic regulation measures mainly supported by government. It is the most direct and effective regulation approach that specialized agencies apply regulating power of AML, which Ministry of Industry and Information Technology of PRC has taken in resolving the dispute between Tencent and 360. To better China＇ s legal form of regulation should be based on her historical tradition and state - owned context and compare the experiences of EU and US on ＂Administrative Restraint＂. There is little distinction between administrative organs and economic bodies on economic behavior, or civil and commercial behavior. AML should be equally applied on the government and the private sector, so the character and position of government could be justified.
出处
《社会科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2011年第9期85-93,共9页
Journal of Social Sciences
关键词
行政垄断
反垄断法
竞争政策
Administrative Monopoly
Anti- Monopoly Law
Competition Law and Policy
