中华人民共和国反垄断法2007(英文版)Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China

中华人民共和国反垄断法Anti-Monopoly Law of the People'sRepublic of ChinaEnglish Version 中文版发文日期：2007-08-30有效范围：全国发文机关：全国人民代表大会常务委员会文号：主席令[2007]第68号时效性：现行有效生效日期：2008-08-01所属分类：反垄断法（市场竞争法->反垄断法）Promulgation Date：08-30-2007 Effective Region：NATIONAL Promulgator： the Standing Committee of the National People's CongressDocument No：Order of the President [2007] No. 68 Effectiveness：Effective Effective Date：08-01-2008 Category：Anti－Monopoly Law （Market Competition Law->Anti－Monopoly Law）中华人民共和国反垄断法Anti-Monopoly Law of the People'sRepublic of China主席令[2007]第68号Order of the President [2007] No. 68 2007年8月30日August 30, 2007《中华人民共和国反垄断法》已由中华人民共和国第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第二十九次会议于2007年8月30日通过，现予公布，自2008年8月1日起施行。

中华人民共和国主席胡锦涛The Anti-Monopoly Law of the People's Republic of China was adopted by the 29th session of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress on August 30, 2007 and is hereby promulgated. It shall go into effect as of August 1, 2008.President of the People's Republic of China: Hu Jintao附件：中华人民共和国反垄断法Attachment: Anti-Monopoly Law of thePeople's Republic of China（2007年8月30日第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第二十九次会议通过）(Adopted by the by the 29th session of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People's Congress on August 30, 2007)目录第一章总则第二章垄断协议第三章滥用市场支配地位第四章经营者集中第五章滥用行政权力排除、限制竞争第六章对涉嫌垄断行为的调查第七章法律责任第八章附则CONTENTSCHAPTER I GENERAL PROVISIONS CHAPTER II MONOPOLY AGREEMENTS CHAPTER III ABUSE OF DOMINANT MARKET POSITIONCHAPTER IV OPERATOR CONSOLIDATION CHAPTER V ABUSE OF ADMINSTATIVE AUTHORITY TO ELIMINATE OR RESTRICT COMPETITIONCHAPTER VI INVESTIGATION OF SUSPECTED MONOPOLISTIC PRACTICES CHAPTER VII LEGAL LIABILITIES CHAPTER VIII SUPPELENTARY PROVISIONS第一章总则CHAPTER I GENERAL PROVISIONS第一条为了预防和制止垄断行为，保护市场公平竞争，提高经济运行效率，维护消费者利益和社会公共利益，促进社会主义市场经济健康发展，制定本法。

禁止垄断协议行为的规定中英文对照版工商行政管理机关禁止垄断协议行为的规定Rules of AIC on Prohibition of Monopoly Agreements第一条为了制止经济活动中的垄断协议行为，根据《中华人民共和国反垄断法》（以下简称《反垄断法》），制定本规定。

Article 1 These Rules are formulated in accordance with the Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter referred to as “AML”) for purpose of preventing monopoly agreement in economic activities.第二条禁止经营者在经济活动中达成垄断协议。

垄断协议是指违反《反垄断法》第十三条、第十四条、第十六条的规定，经营者之间达成的或者行业协会组织本行业经营者达成的排除、限制竞争的协议、决定或者其他协同行为。

协议或者决定包括书面形式和口头形式。

其他协同行为是指经营者虽未明确订立书面或者口头形式的协议或者决定，但实质上存在协调一致的行为。

Article 2Undertakings are prohibited from reaching any monopoly agreement in economic activities.Monopoly agreements shall mean any agreement, decision and other concerted practice reached among undertakings or organized by industry association that eliminate or restrict competition in violation of Article 13, 14, 16 of the AML.An agreement or decision may take written and oral forms.Other concerted practice shall mean colluded coordination in practice between undertakings without express oral or written agreements or decisions.第三条认定其他协同行为，应当考虑下列因素：（一）经营者的市场行为是否具有一致性；（二）经营者之间是否进行过意思联络或者信息交流；（三）经营者能否对一致行为作出合理的解释。

简明反垄断法The Bureau of Competition of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) share responsibility for enforcing laws that promote competition in the marketplace. Competition benefits consumers by keeping prices low and the quality of goods and services high.联邦贸易委员会竞争署和司法部反托拉斯局共同负责实施促进市场竞争的法律。

市场竞争则是通过保持商品的低价以及商品和服务的高质量使消费者受益。

The FTC is a consumer protection agency with two mandates under the FTC Act: to guard the marketplace from unfair methods of competition, and to prevent unfair or deceptive acts or practices that harm consumers. These tasks often involve the analysis of complex business practices and economic issues. When the Commission succeeds in doing both its jobs, it protects consumer sovereignty -- the freedom to choose goods and services in an open marketplace at a price and quality that fit the consumer’s needs -- and fosters opportunity for businesses by ensuring a level playing field among competitors. In pursuing its work, the FTC can file cases in both federal court and a special administrative forum.联邦贸易委员会是在《联邦贸易委员会法》规制下并拥有其两项授权的一个消费者保护机构：一是引导市场避免不公平的竞争；二是杜绝有损消费者利益的不公平或欺骗性的市场行为。

中国反垄断法最新英文版(Chinese Antimonopoy Law)Chinese Antimonopoly Law(adopted at the 29th session of the Tenth National People's Congress on August 30, 2007)Chapter 1: General ProvisionsChapter 2: Monopoly AgreementChapter 3: Abuse of a Dominant Market PositionChapter 4: Concentration of UndertakingsChapter 5: Abuse of Administrative Power to Eliminate or Restrict CompetitionChapter 6: Investigation of the Suspected Monopoly ConductsChapter 7: Legal LiabilitiesChapter 8: Supplementary ArticlesTranslated by Jia YuanSeptember 1, 2007Chapter 1: General ProvisionsArticle 1:This Law is enacted for the purpose of preventing and restraining monopolistic conducts, protecting fair competition in the market, enhancing economic efficiency, safeguarding the interests of consumers and social public interest, promoting the healthy development of the socialist market economy.Article 2:This Law shall be applicable to monopolistic conducts in economic activities within the People’s Republic of China.This Law shall apply to the conducts outside the territory of the People’s Republic of China if they eliminate or have restrictive effect on competition on the domestic market of the PRC.Article 3:“Monopolistic conduct” is defined in this law as the following activities:(i) monopolistic agreements among undertakings;(ii) abuse of dominant market positions by undertakings;(iii) concentration of undertakings that eliminates or restricts competition or might be eliminating or restricting competition;Article 4:The State formulates and carries out competition rules which in accordance with the socialist market economy, perfects macro-control, and advances a unified, open, competitive and orderly market system.Article 5:Undertakings shall through fair competition, voluntary alliance，concentrate according to law, expand the scope of operation, and enhance competition ability.Article 6:Undertakings of a dominant position shall be prohibited to abuse a dominant position, eliminate, and restrict competition.Article 7:For the undertaking in the state-owned economy controlled industries to which are related to national economic lifeline and state security, and in the industries to which the state grants special or exclusive rights, the state protect their lawful operation. The state also lawfully regulates and controls their operation and the price of their commodities and services, safeguards interests of consumers, promotes technical progresses.Undertakings mentioned above shall lawfully operate, be honest and faithful, be strict self-discipline, accept social supervision, shall not damage interests of consumers using their dominant or exclusive positions.Article 8:Administrative power by government and organisations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall be prohibited to abuse administrative power, to eliminate or restrict competition.Article 9:The State Council establishes the Antimonopoly Commission, which in charge of organizing, coordinating, guiding antimonopoly works, performs the following responsibilities:(i) study and draft related competition policies;(ii) organize research, assess general competition situations in the market, issue assess report; (iii) enact and issue antimonopoly guidelines;(iv) coordinate antimonopoly execution works;(v) other responsibilities stipulated by the State Council.The State Council stipulates composition and working rules of the Antimonopoly Commission.Article 10:Antimonopoly execution authorities are in charge of antimonopoly execution pursuant to this law.Antimonopoly execution authorities shall authorise the corresponded authorities of provincial government or government in an autonomous region or directly municipality to in charge of antimonopoly execution pursuant to this law, when needed.Article 11:Association of undertakings should intensify industrial self-discipline, guide undertakings to lawfully compete, safeguard the competition order in the market.Article 12:An “undertaking” in this law refers to a legal person, other organization or natural person that engages in businesses of commodities (hereinafter “commodities” include services).A “relevant market” in this law refers to the territorial area within which the undertakings compete against each other during a time period for relevant products.Chapter 2: Monopoly AgreementArticle 13:Any following agreements among the undertakings competed with each other shall be prohibited:(i) fix, or change prices of products;(ii) limit the output or sales of the products;(iii) allocate the sales markets or the raw material purchasing markets;(iv) limit the purchase new technology or new facilities, or the development of, new products or new technology;(v) jointly boycott transactions;(vi) other agreements identified by antimonopoly execution authorities.Agreements referred to this law are agreement, decision or concerted action which eliminate or restrict competition.Article 14:Any following agreements among undertaking and counterparty are prohibited:(i) fix the price for resale;(ii) restrict the lowest price for resale;(iii) another monopoly agreement identified by antimonopoly execution authorities.Article 15:Agreements among undertakings with one of the following objectives shall be exempted from application of article 13, 14 if(i) agreements to improve technology, to research and develop new products.(ii) agreements for the purpose of product quality upgrading, cost reduction and efficiency improvement, of unify standards, norms or specialise;(iii) agreements by small and medium-sized enterprises to improve operational efficiency and to enhance their competitiveness;(v) agreements to cope with economic depression, to moderate serious decrease in sales volumes or distinct production surplus;(iv) agreements to achieve public interests, such as save energy, protect environment, relieve the victims of a disaster and so on;(vi) agreements to maintain legitimate interest in the cooperation with foreign economic entities and foreign trade;(vii) other situation stipulated by laws and the State Council.Undertakings pursuant to (i) to (v), and therefore exempted from Article 13, 14, must additionally prove, that the agreements can enable consumers to share impartially the interests derived from the agreements, and will not entirely eliminate the competition in relevant market.Article 16:Association of industry shall be prohibited to organize undertakings to conduct monopoly activities being prohibited by this law.Chapter 3: Abuse of a Dominant Market PositionArticle 17Undertakings of a dominant market position shall not abuse their dominant market positions to conduct following conducts:(i) sell commodities at unfairly high prices or buy commodities at unfairly low prices;(ii) sell commoditiews at prices below cost without legitimate reasons;(iii) refuse to trade with counterparty without legitimate reasons;(iv) require its counterparty to trade exclusively with it or trade exclusively with the appointedundertakings without legitimate reasons;(v) tie products or require as unreasonable conditions for trading without legitimate reasons; (vi) apply dissimilar prices or other transaction terms to equivalent counterparties;(vii) other conducts identified as abuse of a dominant position by antimonopoly execution authoritiesFor the purposes of this law, “dominant market position” refers to the undertaking(s) having the ability to control the price, quantity or other trading conditions of products in relevant market, or to hinder or affect other undertakings to enter the relevant market.Article 18:The following factors will be taken into consideration in finding dominant market position: (i) market share in relevant market, and the competition situation of the relevant market; (ii) ability to control the sales markets or the raw material purchasing markets;(iii) financial status and technical conditions of the undertaking;(iv) the degree of dependence of other undertakings;(v) entry to relevant market by other undertakings;(vi) other factors related to find a dominant market position.Article 19:Undertakings that have any of the following situations can be assumed to be have a dominant market position:(i) the relevant market share of one undertaking accounts for1/2 or above;(ii) the joint relevant market share of two undertakings accounts for 2/3 or above;(iii) the joint relevant market share of three undertakings accounts for 3/4 or above.Undertakings with a market share of less than 1/10 will not be deemed as occupying a dominant market position even if they fall within the scope of second or third item.When the Undertakings assumed to have a dominant market position can prove, that they do not have a dominant market, shall not be assumed to have a dominant market position.Chapter 4: Concentration of UndertakingsArticle 20:A concentration refers to the following situations:(i) the merger of undertakings;(ii) the acquisition by undertakings, whether by purchase of securities or assets, of control of other undertakings;(iii) the acquisition by contact or any other means, of control of other undertakings or of possibility of exercising decisive influence on other undertakings.Article 21:A concentration falls under the notification criteria issued by the State Council, a report must be notify in advance with the antimonopoly execution authorities. Without notification the concentration shall not be implemented.Article 22:A concentration refers to following situations, shall not notify to the antimonopoly execution authorities:(i) one undertaking which is a party to the concentration has the power to exercise more than half the voting rights of every other undertaking, whether of the equity or the asset;(ii) one undertaking which is not a party to the concentration has the power to exercise more than half the voting rights of every undertaking concerned, whether of the equity or the asset;Article 23:Undertakings which notify a concentration in advance with the antimonopoly execution authorities, shall submit following documents or materials:(i) summary of notification;(ii) the effect on competition on the relevant market of the concentration;(iii) agreement of concentration;(iv) the financial reports and accounting reports of the proceeding accounting year of the undertakings concerned;(v) other documents or materials stipulated by antimonopoly execution authorities.The summary of notification shall record, name, residence, scope of business, expected date for concentrating and other items stipulated by antimonopoly execution authorities of the undertakings concerned.Article 24:In case that the documents submitted by the notifying undertakings are not complete, shall submit the rest of the documents and materials with a set period stipulated by antimonopoly execution authorities. It will be taken as not notified, when the added documents and materials are not timely submitted.Article 25:The antimonopoly execution authorities shall preliminarily review the notified concentration and take the decisions whether to precede review and notify the undertakings in written form within 30 days, calculated from the date of receipt of the complete filing documents and materials referred to article 23 submitted by the undertakings.Before a decision taken by the antimonopoly execution authorities, the concentration shall be not implemented.If the antimonopoly execution authorities has taken decision not to precede review or has not decided in case of expiring of the period, the concentration shall be implemented.Article 26:If the antimonopoly execution authorities has decided to precede the review, shall review and decide whether to prohibit the concentration and notify the undertakings in written form within 90 days, calculated form the date of the decision being taken.If the concentration is prohibited, the reasons shall be explained. Within the review period the concentration shall be not implemented.Under the following circumstances, the time limit stipulated in the first paragraph may be extended to add 60 days after notifying the undertakings in written form:(i) the undertakings concerned agree to extend the time limit;(ii) the documents or materials submitted are inaccurate and need verification;(iii) other significant events occurred after notification.If the antimonopoly execution authorities have not decided in case of expiring of the period, the concentration shall be implemented.In the review of a concentration the following factors shall be considered:(i) market share in the relevant market of the undertakings concerned and their ability to control the market;(ii) concentrate degree of the relevant market ;(iii) effect on the market entry and technology improvement;(iv) effect on consumers and other undertakings;(v) effect on national economical improvement(vi) other factors shall affect the competition, be considered by the antimonopoly execution authorities.Article 28:If a concentration has or may have effect of eliminating or restricting competition, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall take decision of prohibition. However, if the undertakings can prove that the concentration bring more positive effect than negative effect on competition, or the concentration pursuant to public interests, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall decide, not to prohibit the concentration.Article 29:The antimonopoly execution authorities shall make a decision of approval with restrictions and conditions where a concentration will reduce the negative effect on competition.Article 30:The antimonopoly execution authorities shall announce the decisions of prohibition or conditional concentration to public.In case the acquisition of domestic enterprises by foreign investors or other manners to concentrate referred to national security, besides being reviewed according to this law, shall be carried out national safety review according to related regulations.Chapter 5: Abuse of Administrative Power to Eliminate or Restrict CompetitionArticle 32:Administrative power by government and organisations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall not abuse administrative power to limit or limit in a different form the organizations or persons to operate, purchase or use the products of any undertakings designated by them.Article 33:Administrative power by government and organisations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall not abuse administrative power to carry out following conducts, to hinder the free flow of the commodities between regions:(i) create discriminated items, carry out discriminated standards, or stipulate discriminated prices to nonlocal commodities.(ii) stipulate different technical requisition, test standards to nonlocal an local commodities, or conduct repeat testing, repeat certification and so on, in order to limit nonlocal commodities to enter local market;(iii) specially require administrative permit to counter nonlocal commodities, in order to limit nonlocal commodities to enter local market;(iv) create burdens or other methods to limit nonlocal commodities enter or local commodities exit;(v) other conducts which hinder commodities free flow between regions.Administrative power by government and organisations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall not abuse administrative power to exclude or restrict nonlocal undertakings to participate local bids activities through the manners that they create discriminated quality requisitions, judge standards or not announce information according to law.Article 35:Administrative power by government and organisations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall not abuse administrative power to exclude or restrict nonlocal undertakings to set up branches through that they give unfair treatment to nonlocal undertakings.Article 36:Administrative power by government and organisations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall not abuse administrative power to force the undertakings to carry out monopoly conducts according to this law.Article 37:Administrative power shall not abuse administrative power to stipulate regulations including contents to eliminate or restrict competition.Chapter 6: Investigation of the Suspected Monopoly ConductsArticle 38:The antimonopoly execution authorities investigate monopoly conducts according to law.Refers to antimonopoly conduct, any organization or person has the right to report to the antimonopoly execution authorities. The antimonopoly execution authorities shall keep the secret for the reporter.If the report is submitted in written form and supplies related facts and proofs, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall conduct necessary investigation.Article 39:When conducting investigations, the antimonopoly execution authorities can take the following measures:(i) enter the premise or other related places of the undertakings being investigated;(ii) request the undertaking concerned, interested parties and other relevant organizations or persons being investigated to explain related circumstances;(iii) exam, copy related documents and materials of the undertakings, interested parties and other relevant organizations or persons being investigated, such as certificates, agreements, accounting books, letters and telegraphs of business, electronic data and so on.(iv) seal up or detain related proofs;(v) inquire about the bank account information of the undertakings concerned.Taking the measures stipulated above, shall be reported in written form to the chef person in charge of the antimonopoly execution authorities, and be approved.Article 40:Investigating the suspected monopoly conducts by the antimonopoly execution authorities, the executors shall be not less than two persons, and shall show the papers of execution.The executor conduct inquiring and investigating, shall fabricate written notes which are signature by the inquired or investigated person.Article 41:The antimonopoly execution authorities and their staffs shall be obliged to keep the secret which known in the execution.Article 42:Undertakings concerned, interested parties or other related organizations or persons being investigated shall cooperate with the antimonopoly execution authorities by performing responsibility, shall not refuse or hinder the antimonopoly execution authorities to investigate.Article 43:Undertakings concerned, interested parties being investigated have the right to state opinions. The antimonopoly execution authorities shall verify the facts, reasons and proofs being given by undertakings concerned, interested parties being investigated.Article 44:After investigating and verifying the suspected monopoly conducts, if the antimonopoly execution authorities believe that monopoly conduct was done, shall take decisions according to law and publish it.Article 45:In case of a suspected monopoly conduct being investigated by the antimonopoly execution authorities, if the undertakings being investigated promise that they will conduct concrete measures to eliminate the negative effect of the monopoly conducts within a time limit being acknowledged by the antimonopoly execution authorities, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall decide to suspend the investigation. The decision to suspend the investigation shall note what concrete was promised by the undertakings being investigated.If the antimonopoly execution authorities decide to suspend investigation, shall supervision the circumstances in which undertakings perform their promises. If the undertakings have performed the promises, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall decide to stop the investigation.Under the following circumstances, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall regain theinvestigation:(i) undertakings have not performed the promises;(ii) the fact being applied to suspend the investigation has significant changed.(iii) the decision to suspend the investigation is based on uncompleted or untruthful information being supplied by the undertakings.Chapter 7: Legal LiabilitiesArticle 46:In case there exists monopoly agreement and is implemented by the undertakings in violation of this law, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall order the undertakings to cease such act, the illegal gains shall be confiscated, and a fine between 1% and 10% of the turnover in the preceding year shall be imposed; If the monopoly agreement is not implemented, a fine below 500,000 Yuan shall be imposed.If the undertakings actively report the circumstance of the monopoly agreement to the antimonopoly execution authorities and supply important proofs, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall reduce or remit the fines according to own judgement.If the association of undertakings organise undertakings of the branch to reach monopoly agreement in violation of this law, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall impose a fine below 500,000 Yuan; and if the circumstances are serious, the social organization register administrative department shall dissolve the register.Article 47:In case there exists an act abusing dominant market position by the undertakings in violation of this law, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall order the undertakings to cease such act, the illegal gains shall be confiscated, and a fine between 1% and 10% of the turnover in the preceding year shall be imposed.Article 48:In case the undertakings concentrate in violation of this law, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall order the undertakings to cease concentration, dispose securities or assets in limited time, transfer the operation and conduct other necessary measures to regain the status before the concentration, a fine below 500,000 shall be imposed.Article 49:Referred to the fines of article 46, 47, 48 of this law, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall consider the nature, degree and time of duration of the violation, to decide concrete amount of fine.Article 50:If undertakings carry out monopoly conduct, and cause losses to others, shall bear civil liability according to law.Article 51:If administrative power by government and organisations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues abuse administrative power, to eliminate or restrict competition, shall be ordered by superior authorities to correct themselves; people in direct charge and people directly involved shall be imposed administrative punishment. The antimonopoly execution authorities shall supply suggestion to related superior authorities to handle according to law.If administrative power by government and organisations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues abuse administrative power, to eliminate or restrict competition will be handled by another regulation, shall be applied to another regulation.Article 52:In reviewing and investigating by the antimonopoly execution authorities, if they refuse to supply related materials, information, or supply incorrect materials, information, or remove, hide or destroy proofs, or other conducts to refuse or hinder investigation, the antimonopoly execution authorities shall order the undertakings to cease such act, A fine not to exceed20,000 Yuan to individuals and 200,000 Yuan to organization may be assessed. If the circumstances are serious, a fine not to between 20,000 Yuan and 100,000 Yuan to individuals and between 200,000 Yuan and 1000,000 Yuan to organization may be assessed; if the said act constitutes a criminal offence, prosecution will be launched according to law.Article 53:If the undertaking does not accept the decision made by the antimonopoly execution authorities according to article 28, 29 of this law, he/she shall in the first place apply for administrative review; and if the undertaking still disagree with the decision of the administrative review, he/she may file a administrative lawsuit according to law.If the undertaking does not accept the decision made by the antimonopoly execution authorities besides the decisions stipulated by first paragraph, he/she shall apply for administrative review according to law or file administrative lawsuit.Article 54:Any employee of the antimonopoly execution authorities who abuse his official power, neglect his duties, engage in malpractices or irregularities, or disclose any trade secret, constitute a criminal offence, prosecution will be launched according to law. Where the act is not so serious as to be prosecuted for criminal liability, he shall be imposed the administrative penalty according to law.Chapter 8: Supplementary ArticlesArticle 55:Undertakings exercise intellectual property rights according to laws , administrative regulations related intellectual property rights, shall not be applied to this law; however, undertakings abuse the intellectual property rights to eliminate or restrict competition, shall be applied to this law.Article 56:Agricultural producers and rural economic organizations alliance or concerted act in the producing, processing, selling, transporting or reserving agricultural products shall be not applied to this law.Article 57:This law is effective as of August 1, 2008译者：袁嘉译者对本翻译稿具有著作权,如有转载,请说明出处.。

法律法规名称中英对照中华人民共和国发票管理办法Measures of the People's Republic of China for the Control of Invoices中华人民共和国澳门特别行政区基本法THE Basic Law of the Macao Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国版权法Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国保守国家秘密法Law of the People's Republic of China on Guarding State Secrets 中华人民共和国保险法Insurance Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国标准化法Standardization Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国兵役法Military Service Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国草原法Grassland Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国测绘法Surveying and Mapping Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国城市房地产管理法Law of the People's Republic of China on Administration of the Urban Real Estate中华人民共和国城市规划法City Planning Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国城市居民委员会组织法Organic Law of the Urban Residents Committee of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国村民委员会组织法Organic Law of the Villagers Committees of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国大气污染防治法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Prevention and Control of Atmospheric Pollution (Amended on 8/29/1995)中华人民共和国大气污染防治法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Prevention and Control of Atmospheric Pollution中华人民共和国地方各级人民代表大会和地方各级人民政府组织法Organic Law of the Local People's Congresses and Local People's Governments of the People's Republic of China (Amended in 1995)中华人民共和国缔结条约程序法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Procedure of the conclusion of Treaties中华人民共和国电力法Electricity Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国对外贸易法Foreign Trade Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国对外贸易法Foreign Trade Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国法官法Judges Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国反不正当竞争法Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China 中华人民共和国防空法Civil Air Defense Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国妇女权益保护法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Rights and Interests of Women中华人民共和国个人所得税法Individual Income T ax Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国公民出境入境管理法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Control of the Exit and Entry of Citizens中华人民共和国公民出境入境管理法实施细则Rules for Implementation of the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Control of the Exit and Entry of Citizens (Amended on 7/15/1994) 中华人民共和国公民出入境管理法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Control of the Exitand Entry of Citizens中华人民共和国公司法Company Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国归侨侨眷权益保护法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of the Rights and Interests of Returned Overseas Chinese and the Family Members of Overseas Chinese中华人民共和国国防法National defense law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国国徽法Law of the People's Republic of China on the National Emblem中华人民共和国国籍法Nationality Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国国家安全法State Security Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国国家赔偿法Law of the People's Republic of China on State Compensation中华人民共和国国境卫生检疫法Frontier Health and Quarantine Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国国旗法Law of the People's Republic of China on the National Flag中华人民共和国国务院组织法Organic Law of the State Council of the People's Republic of China 中华人民共和国海关法Customs Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国海商法Maritime Code of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国海上交通安全法Maritime Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国海洋环境保护法Marine Environment Protection Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国海洋环境保护法Marine Environment Protection Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国海域使用管理法Sea Area Use Management Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国合伙企业登记管理办法Measures of the People's Republic of China for the Administration of Partnership Enterprise Registration中华人民共和国红十字标志使用办法Provisions of the People's Republic of China on the Use of Red Cross Signs中华人民共和国红十字会法Law of the People's Republic of China on Red Cross Society中华人民共和国环境保护法Environmental Protection Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国婚姻法Marriage Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国集会游行示威法Law of the People's Republic of China on Assemblies, Processions and Demonstrations中华人民共和国计量法Metrology Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国继承法Law of Succession of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国监狱法Prison Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国检察官法Public Procurators Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国节约能源法Energy Conservation Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国戒严法Martial Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国进出口商品检验法Law of The People's Republic of China on Import and Export Com-Modity Inspection中华人民共和国军事设施保护法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Military Installations中华人民共和国科学技术进步法Law of the People's Republic of China on Science and Technology Progress中华人民共和国矿产资源法Mineral Resources Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国领海及毗连区法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone中华人民共和国民法通则General Principles of the Civil Law of the People's Republic of China 中华人民共和国民事诉讼法Civil Procedure Law of The People's Republic 0f China中华人民共和国民事诉讼法（1991）Civil Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国民用航空法Civil Aviation Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国民族区域自治法Law of the People's Republic of China on Regional National Autonomy中华人民共和国拍卖法Auction Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国企业法人登记管理条例Regulations of the People's Republic of China for Controlling the Registration of Enterprises As Legal Persons中华人民共和国全国人民代表大会和地方各级人民代表大会选举法Electoral Law of the National People's Congress and Local People's Congress of the People's Republic of China (Amended in 1995)中华人民共和国全国人民代表大会组织法Organic Law of the National People's Congress of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国人民警察法People's Police Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国森林法Forestry Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国商标法Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国商标法（修正）Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国涉外经济合同法Law of The People's Republic of China on Economic Contracts involving Foreign Interest中华人民共和国食品卫生法（1995）Food Hygiene Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国收养法（1998年11月4日修改）Adoption Law of the People's Republic of China (Amended on 11/4/1998)中华人民共和国水法Water Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国水污染防治法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Prevention and Control of Water Pollution中华人民共和国水污染防治法（1996）Law of the People's Republic of China on the Prevention and Control of Water Pollution (Amended on 5/15/1996)中华人民共和国税收征收管理法（1995）Law of the People's Republic of China on the Administration of T ax Collection (Amended on 2/28/1995)中华人民共和国条约缔结程序法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Procedure of the Conclusion of Treaties中华人民共和国统计法Statistics Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国土地管理法实施条例Regulations on the Implementation of the Land Administration Law of the People's Republic of China (1998)中华人民共和国外国企业所得税法The Foreign Enterprise Income T ax Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国外国人出入境管理法Law of the People's Republic of China on Control of the Entry and Exit of Aliens中华人民共和国外国人入境出境管理法Law of the People's Republic of China on Control of the Entry and Exit of Aliens中华人民共和国外国人入境出境管理法实施细则Rules for Implementation of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Control of the Entry and Exit of Aliens中华人民共和国外商投资企业和外国企业所得税法Income T ax Law of The People's Republic of China for Enterprises with Foreign Investment and Foreign Enterprises中华人民共和国外资企业法Law of the People's Republic of China on Foreign-Capital Enterprises中华人民共和国未成年人保护法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Minors 中华人民共和国文物保护法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Cultural Relics中华人民共和国宪法Constitution of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国宪法修正案Amendment to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China 中华人民共和国宪法修正案（1988）Amendment to the Constitution of the People's Republic of China (1988)中华人民共和国献血法Blood Donation Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国香港特别行政区基本法The Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国香港特别行政区选举第九届全国人民代表大会代表的办法Procedures for the Election of Delegates of the Hong Kong SAR of the People's Republic of China to the Ninth NPC中华人民共和国香港特别行政区驻军法Garrison Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国香港特别行政区驻军法Law of the People's Republic of China on Garrisoning the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region中华人民共和国消费者权益保护法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Consumers' Rights and Interests中华人民共和国刑法Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国行政处罚法The Law of the People's Republic of China on Administrative Punishments中华人民共和国行政诉讼法Administrative Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国烟草专卖法Law of the People's Republic of China on Tobacco Monopoly中华人民共和国药品管理法Pharmaceutical Administration Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国药品管理法实施办法Measures for the Implementation of the Pharmaceutical Administration Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国野生动物保护法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Wild Life中华人民共和国野生动物保护法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Wildlife中华人民共和国义务教育法Compulsory Education Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国邮政法Postal Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国预备役军官法Reserve Officers Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国中国人民银行法Law of the People's Republic of China on the People's Bank of China中华人民共和国中外合资经营企业法Law of the People's Republic of China on Chinese-Foreign Equity Joint Ventures中华人民共和国中外合作经营企业法Law of the People's Republic of China on Chinese Foreign Contractual Joint Ventures中华人民共和国仲裁法Arbitration Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国著作权法Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国专利法（修正）Patent Law of the People's Republic of China中华人民共和国专属经济区和大陆架法Law of the People's Republic of China on the Exclusive Economic Zone and the Continental Shelf。

法学专业外文翻译外文文献英文文献从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制Legal Regulation of Administrative Monopoly As Viewed fromChinese Antimonopoly LawLing WangLaw school of Shandong University of TechnologyZibo 255049, Shandong, ChinaAbstractThe administrative monopoly breaks the principle of justice, and has large harm to the society. The special chapter in Chinese Antimonopoly Law regulates the contents and corresponding legal responsibilities of administrative monopoly, but the law still has some deficiencies. The Chinese Antimonopoly Law should be perfected from increasing the operation property, confirming the comprehensive legal responsibilities, confirming the law enforcement agency of anti-administrative monopoly, expanding the range of legal regulation and establishing the judicial review system.Keywords: Chinese Antimonopoly Law, Administrative monopoly, RegulationIn china, the administrative monopoly mainly means the behaviors that administrative subjects harm the market competition and destroy socialism market economy order by the administrative power. The administrative monopoly initially belongs to economic monopoly, and its harm is more than economic monopoly, and it destroys the principle of justice, and induces the occurrence of unfair competition and monopoly in special market, and it harms the benefits of most market subjects,and largely wastes effective resources, and blocks the establishment and perfection of the socialism market competition mechanism. Therefore, it should seek solution and regulation methods from various approaches for the administrative monopoly. Only in this way, the obstacle of Chinese economic system reform and the development of market economy can be removed, which can promote the quick development of economy, enhance the living level of people, improve the total survival environment, and realize the harmony and stability of the society.1. Regulation of administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly LawFor the regulation of administrative monopoly, there are many researches and discussions among Chinese scholars, and the system reform view and the legal regulation view are representative views. The system reform view thinks that the administrative monopoly is the product of system, and it can be completely solved by deepening the economic system reform and the political system reform, and the legal measure is hard to solve the problem of administrative monopoly. The central content of the legal regulation view is that the administrative monopoly is very harmful, and it must be forbidden mainly by the laws. The legal regulation view is also can be divided into two factions, and one is to mainly use the administrative law to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the other thinks that Chinese Antimonopoly Law is the main power to regulate the administrative monopoly.Because Chinese economic and political system reform is a gradual process which needs quite long-term endeavors, and this transfer needs large patient and willpower, so the administrativemonopoly has been a very hot potato at present, and it has seriously blocked the economic development of China with large social harms, and it even blocks the economic and political system reforms which is being in China, so it must be forbidden as soon as possible, or else, the large destroying function on the development of Chinese economy will be hard to image. Therefore, it is too ideal to only depend on the system reform to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the effect is not obvious. In the present national situation, law is the feasible measure to regulate the administrative monopoly. Because the administrative monopoly roots in economic monopoly and has many characters and harms of economic monopoly, more and more legal scholars want to utilize Chinese Antimonopoly Law to regulate the administrative monopoly. “It is the characteristic of Chinese Antimonopoly Law to take the administrative monopoly as the control object of antimonopoly, and it seems a necessary selection according to the national situation, because the administrative monopoly forming in traditional planned economy system is impossible to be removed by administrative measure, and it can only be solved by the legal measure, i.e. the Antimonopoly Law (Zhang, 1993, P.357)”.At August 1 of 2008, Chinese Antimonopoly Law became effective in people’s expectations, and the fifth chapter specially regulates the content of administrative monopoly, and the articles from 32 to 37 respectively generalize the elimination of administrative power abuse and the behaviors of competition limitation, and completely regulate the concrete represent form of administrative monopoly, and article 51 regulates corresponding legalresponsibilities. Thus，the regulation of administrativemonopoly is first regulated in law, andthe legal approach is the main measure to govern the administrative monopoly, which indicated that the legal regulation view had been adopted finally. The contents of administrative monopoly in the Antimonopoly Law embodies the advancement of Chinese legal theory study and legislation technology, and it showed the decision of Chinese legislators to standardize the enforcement of administrative power and stop the abuse of administrative power. Of course, law is only one most important measure to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the reasonable and effective reforms in polity and economy also have very important meanings for the regulation of administrative monopoly behaviors.2. Deficiencies of administrative monopoly regulation in Chinese Antimonopoly LawRelative regulations about administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly Law are active and helpful exploration to regulate administrative monopoly behaviors by law, and corresponding legal regulations are deeply meaningful and influencing to eliminate the bad influences of administrative monopoly, promote the fair competition, establish normal market order, and guarantee the ordered development of market economy. However, whether relative corresponding systems or the articles in the chapter 5 still have some deficiencies, and the anti-administrative monopoly much still remains to be done.2.1 Regulations are too fundamental to operateThe articles in the chapter 5 of Chinese Antimonopoly Law are some principled articles lacking in operation, which make the judiciary and law enforcement agencies are difficult to distinguish. And many abstract concepts such as what extent canachieve administrative monopoly, and what is that the abuse of administrative power to block the free circulation of commodities can not be defined clearly in only five legal articles, so the catchwords ofanti-administrative monopoly appear incapable. At August 1 of 2008, the first day when Chinese Antimonopoly Law was implemented, Chinese State Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine encountered the first case about Chinese Antimonopoly Law. However, in the expectation of ten thousands of people, this case came to an untimely end, and though the court adopted the article that the limitation of actions was over to evade this case, but it can be supposed that if the court can not evade it by relative reasons, what is the result? Was the behavior that Chinese State Administration of Quality Supervision forced to push the electric supervision code business of Citic Guoan Information Technology Co., Ltd with its own shares in 69 kinds of product an administrative monopoly behavior? The result might reach the same goal by different routes. And relative regulations about the current antimonopoly law endow law-officers too much discretion to make them to “go after profits and avoid disadvantages”.2.2 The regulations about the legal responsibility of administrative monopoly are deficientChinese Antimonopoly Law regulates the civil, administrative and criminal responsibilities assumed by managers who implement monopoly behaviors in detail, but for the legal responsibility of the behaviors of administrative monopoly, only the article 51 of Chinese Antimonopoly L aw regulates that “If administrative power by government and organizations to whichlaws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues abuse administrative power, to eliminate or restrict competition, shall be ordered by superior authorities to correct themselves; people in direct charge and people directly involved shall be imposed administrative punishment. The antimonopoly execution authorities shall supply suggestion to related superior authorities to handle according to law.” Many administra tive responsibilities such as “shall be ordered by superior authorities to correct themselves; people in direct cha rge and people directly involved shall be imposed administrative punishment” form different legal results of different subjects to implement monopoly behaviors, so peoplebegin to suspect the justice of laws, which virtually helps the administrative subjects to implement administrative monopoly, and the deterrent force will be reduced largely. At the same time, though the responsibility of Chinese Antimonopoly Law is too lighter and becomes a mere formality, and the law is not obeyed and strictly enforced, so the administrative monopoly remains incessant after repeated prohibition.2.3 The jurisdiction of antimonopoly law enforcement institution is limitedThe definition about the anti-administrative monopoly law enforcement agency in the fifty first article of Chinese Antimonopoly Law is still blurry, and on the one hand, the supervision procedures should be independently established to restrain laws by this law, and on the other hand, the law regulates that the administrative monopoly should be dominated by superior authorities, and the article that “If administrative power by government and organizations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues abuse administrativepower, to eliminate or restrict competition will be handled by another regulation, shall be applied to another regulation” has left large space for the rights of relative departments and supervision institutions, which has eliminated the jurisdiction of anti-administrative monopoly law enforcement agent to the administrative monopoly. At the same time, it is not reasonable to handle the behaviors of administrative monopoly by the superior authority of lawbreaker for the legal responsibilities. The superior authority is not a specific authority, because the authorities implementing administrative monopoly are different, and the law enforcement has be decomposed to various functional authorities, which will easily induce repeat law enforcements or blank law enforcement. Furthermore, the superior authority is not the authority to specially dominate administrative monopoly, or the special judicial authority, and it just is common law enforcement authority (Wang, 2007). Staffs in superior authority may not have strong antimonopoly consciousness, and both the cognition and treatment result all lack in authorities, and they also lack in the ability to teat the cases about administrative monopoly.2.4 The range of administrative monopoly regulation is too narrowThe article 33 of Chinese Antimonopoly Law limits the object of administrative monopoly in the domain of goods trade. “Administrative power by government and organizations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall not abuse administrative power to carry out following conducts, to hinder the free flow of the commodities between regions”. In fact, the character of the transfer of modern economic industry structure is that the proportion of the serviceindustry is enhanced increasingly, and if the object of the anti-administrative monopoly is only limited in the domain of goods trade, the domain which is bigger and occupies more proportion will be abandoned out of the supervision of Chinese Antimonopoly Law. Though the article 34 forbids and excludes that exterior managers participate in local bid invitation and bidding activities, and the article 35 forbids and excludes that exterior managers invest or establish branches including the domainof service trade in local region, but there are many items in the service industry out of these two ranges, and the legal regulation about administrative monopoly behaviors in the domain of service industry is still blank in Chinese Antimonopoly Law.2.5 Regulation measures for abstract administrative monopoly are deficientThough Chinese Antimonopoly Law has prohibitive regulations about the behaviors of abstract administrative monopoly, but it regulates nothing about legal responsibility and relief ways. If the illegal behavior of abstract administration can not be redressed in time in practice, it will always induce larger harm (Huang, 2001). Many administrative monopoly behaviors in practice are implemented by the mode of abstract administrative monopoly behavior, and even certain concrete administrative monopoly behavior is always done according to administrative rules, but these rules must be examined and approved, recorded or agreed by superior people’s governments or charge authorities, and when they are dissented, the judgment right is always in original authorities which will be hard to deny the rules and byelaws what they constituted. In addition, most countriesadopt the judicial review system to treat the abstract administrative behavior by the mode of inefficacy or nonexistence, but this system in Chinese Antimonopoly Law is deficient, so the illegal behaviors of administrative subject is hard to be redressed.3. Perfection of administrative monopoly regulation in Chinese Antimonopoly LawAbove aspects about the legal regulation for the administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly Law all need to be perfected and simple opinions are offered as follows.3.1 Using foreign mature experiences as references and increasing the operation feature of Chinese Antimonopoly Law Law enforcement should be executed according to laws, and that means the clear description of legal concepts is the premise to exactly enforce laws, and the specific description of legal rules is the base to enforce laws strictly, but the problems about administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly are very complex, and some legal concepts have not been defined, and detailed legal standards and concrete legal responsibility should be further confirmed. Therefore, the content of the chapter 5 in Chinese Antimonopoly Law can be regarded as the principled legal rules to regulate administrative monopoly, and the explanation of general principles is a complex and hard task, just as when US modified the Antimonopoly Law, it added the word of “efficiency judgment”, and the American Competition Bureau used 13000 words to explain it. It is necessary to explain the criterion of general rules, and only to constitute suited rules as soon as possibly, and explain the principled articles in detail, the operation character of Chinese Antimonopoly Law can be added, and the uniform law enforcement standards can beestablished to effectively regulate the administrative monopoly behaviors by law.3.2 Establishing various administrative monopoly legal responsibility systemsThe past laws in China only regulated administrative monopoly by administrative responsibility, but ignored the function of civil responsibility and criminal responsibility. To more effectively regulate administrative monopoly, the particularity of administrative monopoly should be considered fully, and constitute comprehensive legal responsibilities including administrative responsibility, civil responsibility and criminal responsibility. When maintaining special competitors’ benefits, the behavior of administrative monopoly harms other competitors’ competition right at the same time, and it belongs to a kind of tort, and it should assume corresponding civil responsibility, and though the administrative responsibility includes the system of administrative compensation, but the range of administrative compensation is limited. And to better protect relative parties’ legal rights, Chinese Antimonopoly Law should specially regulate that victims of administrative monopoly have rights to institute civil actions, and obtain corresponding civil damages. At the same time, the behavior of administrative monopoly has large social harm, and it should be adjusted by the criminal law when it seriously harms the society, and furthermore, the social harm extent achieved by administrative monopoly is far bigger than some economic crimes and occupational crimes regulated in current criminal laws, so the measure of criminal punishment is necessary to be adopted.3.3 Confirming independent antimonopoly law enforcement institutions and perfect the law enforcement systemThe legal construction in China is to solve practical problems in the final analysis, and the setup of antimonopoly law enforcement institution is not exceptional. The antimonopoly law enforcement institution should be highly independent. To keep the independent is the life line of antimonopoly law enforcement institution, and the meaning of antimonopoly law, that is also the successful experience to effectively execute antimonopoly laws in most countries. And antimonopoly law enforcement institution must have high specialty character, and the antimonopoly law enforcement is not simple market management, and it comes down to the contents about economy, law and management, so it is a complex project. Professional organization system is the important factor to guarantee the effective operation of law enforcement institution.Independent and professional antimonopoly institution should be endowed by extensive administrative power, quasi-legislative power and quasi-judicial power, and that is the need to regulate administrative monopoly in China and the requirement to treat the development of international antimonopoly.3.4 Combining the generalization mode with the listing mode to specially limit the range of administrative monopoly Because Chinese Antimonopoly Law defines the range of administrative monopoly by the listing mode, and it is mainly limited in the domain of goods trade, which induces that the regulation range of administrative monopoly in China is too narrow and lacks incorresponding flexibility. Using foreign relative experiences as references, China should adopt the mode combining the generalization mode with the listing mode to define the range ofadministrative monopoly.On the one hand, the main representative form of administrative monopoly should be listed specially, and the concrete regulations to regulate administrative monopoly behaviors in the domain of servicing industry should be added. And according to these rules, the antimonopoly law enforcement institutions should quickly judge representative administrative monopoly behaviors, and predict its legal result and increase the efficiency. On the other hand, according to relative authority data, the range of the industry about the national economy and the people’s livelihood should be specially defined, and the monopoly of these indu stries should be protected by laws, and the protective range and degree should also be defined, and for the behavior to illegally expand the monopoly range, corresponding punishment measures should be regulated.Through above analysis, the legal regulation of administrative monopoly behaviors in China just starts, and the relative rules about the administrative monopoly behaviors in Chinese Antimonopoly Law needs to be further perfected and crystallized, and the legal responsibilities about the administrative monopoly behaviors and the jurisdiction of law enforcement institution need to be further confirmed, and the regulation range of administration monopoly needs to be further expanded, and corresponding juridical relief approaches need to be gradually established. At the same time , the system reforms in the economic and political domain need to be further deepened, and the continual perfection of system reform can essentially reduce and stop the happening of administrative monopoly behaviors, and both the system reform and the legal regulation need to be strengthened, which is the essential way tosolve the problem of administrative monopoly.从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制Ling Wang山东科技大学法学院摘要：行政垄断打破了公正原则，并且具有较大的社会危害性。

GNP国民生产总值: Gross national Product. The market value of goods and service produced by the property and labor owned by the economy.GDP 国内生产总值： Gross Domestic product. The market value of all goods and services produced within the geographic area of an economy.Anti-dumping duty反倾销税: a tax levied by a country on imports that it believes to constitute dumping in its own market. Anti-monopoly law反垄断法: a law used to prevent companies from fixing prices, carving up the market, and gaining unfair monopoly advantagesBalance of payments国际收支平衡: a statistical system that records all external expenditure and income activities of a country第一部分金融绝对购买力评价：本国货币与外国货币之间的均衡汇率是通过两国货币之间的购买力或物价水平表现出来的Absolute purchasing power evaluation: the exchange rate between domestic and foreign currencies is expressed by the purchasing power or price level between the two currencies 相对购买力评价：两国之间的通货膨胀率决定两种货币之间的均衡汇率Relative purchasing power evaluation: the inflation rate between the two countries determines the exchange rate between the two currencies短期投资是指企业购入的各种能随时变现、持有时间不超过一年的有价证券，以及不超过一年的其他投资Short-term investment refers to all kinds of securities purchased by enterprises that can be realized at any time and held for no more than one year, as well as other investments that do not exceed one year.长期投资是指不准备随时变现，持有时间超过1年的企业对外投资Long-term investment refers to the outward investment of an enterprise that is not ready to be realized at any time and has been held for more than one year.对冲指特意减低另一项投资的风险的投资。

Legal Regulation of Administrative Monopoly As Viewed fromChinese Antimonopoly LawLing WangLaw school of Shandong University of TechnologyZibo 255049, Shandong, ChinaAbstractThe administrative monopoly breaks the principle of justice, and has large harm to the society. The special chapter in Chinese Antimonopoly Law regulates the contents and corresponding legal responsibilities of administrative monopoly, but the law still has some deficiencies. The Chinese Antimonopoly Law should be perfected from increasing the operation property, confirming the comprehensive legal responsibilities, confirming the law enforcement agency of anti-administrative monopoly, expanding the range of legal regulation and establishing the judicial review system.Keywords: Chinese Antimonopoly Law, Administrative monopoly, RegulationIn china, the administrative monopoly mainly means the behaviors that administrative subjects harm the market competition and destroy socialism market economy order by the administrative power. The administrative monopoly initially belongs to economic monopoly, and its harm is more than economic monopoly, and it destroys the principle of justice, and induces the occurrence of unfair competition and monopoly in special market, and it harms the benefits of most market subjects, and largely wastes effective resources, and blocks the establishment and perfection of the socialism market competition mechanism. Therefore, it should seek solution and regulation methods from various approaches for the administrative monopoly. Only in this way, the obstacle of Chinese economic system reform and the development of market economy can be removed, which can promote the quick development of economy, enhance the living level of people, improve the total survival environment, and realize the harmony and stability of the society.1. Regulation of administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly LawFor the regulation of administrative monopoly, there are many researches and discussions among Chinese scholars, and the system reform view and the legal regulation view are representative views. The system reform view thinks that the administrative monopoly is the product of system, and it can be completely solved by deepening the economic system reform and the political system reform, and the legal measure is hard to solve the problem of administrative monopoly. The central content of the legal regulation view is that the administrative monopoly is very harmful, and it must be forbidden mainly bythe laws. The legal regulation view is also can be divided into two factions, and one is to mainly use the administrative law to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the other thinks that Chinese Antimonopoly Law is the main power to regulate the administrative monopoly.Because Chinese economic and political system reform is a gradual process which needs quite long-term endeavors, and this transfer needs large patient and willpower, so the administrative monopoly has been a very hot potato at present, and it has seriously blocked the economic development of China with large social harms, and it even blocks the economic and political system reforms which is being in China, so it must be forbidden as soon as possible, or else, the large destroying function on the development of Chinese economy will be hard to image. Therefore, it is too ideal to only depend on the system reform to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the effect is not obvious. In the present national situation, law is the feasible measure to regulate the administrative monopoly. Because the administrative monopoly roots in economic monopoly and has many characters and harms of economic monopoly, more and more legal scholars want to utilize Chinese Antimonopoly Law to regulate the administrative monopoly. “It is the characteristic of Chinese Antimonopoly Law to take the administrative monopoly as the control object of antimonopoly, and it seems a necessary selection according to the national situation, because the administrative monopoly forming in traditional planned economy system is impossible to be removed by administrative measure, and it can only be solved by the legal measure, i.e. the Antimonopoly Law (Zhang, 1993, P.357)”.At August 1 of 2008, Chinese Antimonopoly Law became effective in people’s expectations, and the fifth chapter specially regulates the content of administrative monopoly, and the articles from 32 to 37 respectively generalize the elimination of administrative power abuse and the behaviors of competition limitation, and completely regulate the concrete represent form of administrative monopoly, and article 51 regulates corresponding legalresponsibilities. Thus，the regulation of administrative monopoly is first regulated in law, andthe legal approach is the main measure to govern the administrative monopoly, which indicated that the legal regulation view had been adopted finally. The contents of administrative monopoly in the Antimonopoly Law embodies the advancement of Chinese legal theory study and legislation technology, and it showed the decision of Chinese legislators to standardize the enforcement of administrative power and stop the abuse of administrative power. Of course, law is only one most important measure to regulate the administrative monopoly, and the reasonable and effective reforms in polity and economy also have very important meanings for the regulation of administrative monopoly behaviors.2. Deficiencies of administrative monopoly regulation in Chinese Antimonopoly LawRelative regulations about administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly Law are active and helpful exploration to regulate administrative monopoly behaviors by law, and corresponding legal regulations are deeply meaningful and influencing to eliminate the bad influences of administrative monopoly, promote the fair competition, establish normal market order, and guarantee the ordered development of market economy. However, whether relative corresponding systems or the articles in the chapter 5 still have some deficiencies, and the anti-administrative monopoly much still remains to be done.2.1 Regulations are too fundamental to operateThe articles in the chapter 5 of Chinese Antimonopoly Law are some principled articles lacking in operation, which make the judiciary and law enforcement agencies are difficult to distinguish. And many abstract concepts such as what extent can achieve administrative monopoly, and what is that the abuse of administrative power to block the free circulation of commodities can not be defined clearly in only five legal articles, so the catchwords ofanti-administrative monopoly appear incapable. At August 1 of 2008, the first day when Chinese Antimonopoly Law was implemented, Chinese State Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine encountered the first case about Chinese Antimonopoly Law. However, in the expectation of ten thousands of people, this case came to an untimely end, and though the court adopted the article that the limitation of actions was over to evade this case, but it can be supposed that if the court can not evade it by relative reasons, what is the result? Was the behavior that Chinese State Administration of Quality Supervision forced to push the electric supervision code business of Citic Guoan Information Technology Co., Ltd with its own shares in 69 kinds of product an administrative monopoly behavior? The result might reach the same goal by different routes. And relative regulations about the current antimonopoly law endow law-officers too much discretion to make them to “go after profits and avoid disadvantages”.2.2 The regulations about the legal responsibility of administrative monopoly are deficientChinese Antimonopoly Law regulates the civil, administrative and criminal responsibilities assumed by managers who implement monopoly behaviors in detail, but for the legal responsibility of the behaviors of administrative monopoly, only the article 51 of Chinese Antimonopoly Law regulates that “If administrative power by government and organizations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues abuse administrative power, to eliminate or restrict competition, shall be ordered by superior authorities to correct themselves; people in direct charge and people directly involved shall be imposed administrative punishment. The antimonopoly execution authorities shall supply suggestion to related superior authorities to handle according to law.” Many administrative responsibilities such as “shall be ordered by superior authorities to correct themselves; people in direct cha rge and people directly involved shall be imposed administrative punishment” form different legal results of different subjects to implement monopoly behaviors, so peoplebegin to suspect the justice of laws, which virtually helps the administrative subjects to implement administrative monopoly, and the deterrent force will be reduced largely. At the same time, though the responsibility of Chinese Antimonopoly Law is too lighter and becomes a mere formality, and the law is not obeyed and strictly enforced, so the administrative monopoly remains incessant after repeated prohibition.2.3 The jurisdiction of antimonopoly law enforcement institution is limitedThe definition about the anti-administrative monopoly law enforcement agency in the fifty first article of Chinese Antimonopoly Law is still blurry, and on the one hand, the supervision procedures should be independently established to restrain laws by this law, and on the other hand, the law regulates that the administrative monopoly should be dominated by superior authorities, and the article that “If administrative power by government and organizations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues abuse administrative power, to eliminate or restrict competition will be handled by another regulation, shall be applied to another regulation” has left large space for the rights of relative departments and supervision institutions, which has eliminated the jurisdiction ofanti-administrative monopoly law enforcement agent to the administrative monopoly. At the same time, it is not reasonable to handle the behaviors of administrative monopoly by the superior authority of lawbreaker for the legal responsibilities. The superior authority is not a specific authority, because the authorities implementing administrative monopoly are different, and the law enforcement has be decomposed to various functional authorities, which will easily induce repeat law enforcements or blank law enforcement. Furthermore, the superior authority is not the authority to specially dominate administrative monopoly, or the special judicial authority, and it just is common law enforcement authority (Wang, 2007). Staffs in superior authority may not have strong antimonopoly consciousness, and both the cognition and treatment result all lack in authorities, and they also lack in the ability to teat the cases about administrative monopoly.2.4 The range of administrative monopoly regulation is too narrowThe article 33 of Chinese Antimonopoly Law limits the object of administrative monopoly in the domain of goods trade. “Administrative power by government and organizations to which laws and regulations grant rights to administer public issues shall not abuse administrative power to carry out following conducts, to hinder the free flow of the commodities between regions”. In fact, the character of the transfer of modern economic industry structure is that the proportion of the service industry is enhanced increasingly, and if the object of the anti-administrative monopoly is only limited in the domain of goods trade, the domain which is bigger and occupies more proportion will be abandoned out of the supervision of Chinese Antimonopoly Law. Though the article 34 forbids and excludes that exterior managers participate in local bid invitation and bidding activities, and the article 35 forbids and excludes that exterior managers invest or establish branches including the domainof service trade in local region, but there are many items in the service industry out of these two ranges, and the legal regulation about administrative monopoly behaviors in the domain of service industry is still blank in Chinese Antimonopoly Law.2.5 Regulation measures for abstract administrative monopoly are deficientThough Chinese Antimonopoly Law has prohibitive regulations about the behaviors of abstract administrative monopoly, but it regulates nothing about legal responsibility and relief ways. If the illegal behavior of abstract administration can not be redressed in time in practice, it will always induce larger harm (Huang, 2001). Many administrative monopoly behaviors in practice are implemented by the mode of abstract administrative monopoly behavior, and even certain concrete administrative monopoly behavior is always done according to administrative rules, but these rules must be examined and approved, recorded or agreed by superior people’s governments or charge authorities, and when they are dissented, the judgment right is always in original authorities which will be hard to deny the rules and byelaws what they constituted. In addition, most countries adopt the judicial review system to treat the abstract administrative behavior by the mode of inefficacy or nonexistence, but this system in Chinese Antimonopoly Law is deficient, so the illegal behaviors of administrative subject is hard to be redressed.3. Perfection of administrative monopoly regulation in Chinese Antimonopoly LawAbove aspects about the legal regulation for the administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly Law all need to be perfected and simple opinions are offered as follows.3.1 Using foreign mature experiences as references and increasing the operation feature of Chinese Antimonopoly LawLaw enforcement should be executed according to laws, and that means the clear description of legal concepts is the premise to exactly enforce laws, and the specific description of legal rules is the base to enforce laws strictly, but the problems about administrative monopoly in Chinese Antimonopoly are very complex, and some legal concepts have not been defined, and detailed legal standards and concrete legal responsibility should be further confirmed. Therefore, the content of the chapter 5 in Chinese Antimonopoly Law can be regarded as the principled legal rules to regulate administrative monopoly, and the explanation of general principles is a complex and hard task, just as when US modified the Antimonopoly Law, it added the word of “efficiency judgment”, and the American Competition Bureau used 13000 words to explain it. It is necessary to explain the criterion of general rules, and only to constitute suited rules as soon as possibly, and explain the principled articles in detail, the operation character of Chinese Antimonopoly Law can be added, and the uniform law enforcement standards can be established to effectively regulate the administrative monopoly behaviors by law.3.2 Establishing various administrative monopoly legal responsibility systemsThe past laws in China only regulated administrative monopoly by administrative responsibility, but ignored the function of civil responsibility and criminal responsibility. To more effectively regulate administrative monopoly, the particularity of administrative monopoly should be considered fully, and constitute comprehensive legal responsibilities including administrative responsibility, civil responsibility and criminal responsibility. When maintaining special competitors’ benefits, the behavior of administrative monopoly harms other competitors’ competition right at the same time, and it belongs to a kind of tort, and it should assume corresponding civil responsibility, and though the administrative responsibility includes the system of administrative compensation, but the range of administrative compensation is limited. And to better protect relative parties’ legal rights, Chinese Antimonopoly Law should specially regulate that victims of administrative monopoly have rights to institute civil actions, and obtain corresponding civil damages. At the same time, the behavior of administrative monopoly has large social harm, and it should be adjusted by the criminal law when it seriously harms the society, and furthermore, the social harm extent achieved by administrative monopoly is far bigger than some economic crimes and occupational crimes regulated in current criminal laws, so the measure of criminal punishment is necessary to be adopted.3.3 Confirming independent antimonopoly law enforcement institutions and perfect the law enforcement systemThe legal construction in China is to solve practical problems in the final analysis, and the setup of antimonopoly law enforcement institution is not exceptional. The antimonopoly law enforcement institution should be highly independent. To keep the independent is the life line of antimonopoly law enforcement institution, and the meaning of antimonopoly law, that is also the successful experience to effectively execute antimonopoly laws in most countries. And antimonopoly law enforcement institution must have high specialty character, and the antimonopoly law enforcement is not simple market management, and it comes down to the contents about economy, law and management, so it is a complex project. Professional organization system is the important factor to guarantee the effective operation of law enforcement institution.Independent and professional antimonopoly institution should be endowed by extensive administrative power, quasi-legislative power and quasi-judicial power, and that is the need to regulate administrative monopoly in China and the requirement to treat the development of international antimonopoly.3.4 Combining the generalization mode with the listing mode to specially limit the range of administrative monopolyBecause Chinese Antimonopoly Law defines the range of administrative monopoly by the listing mode, and it is mainly limited in the domain of goods trade, which induces that the regulation range of administrative monopoly in China is too narrow and lacks incorresponding flexibility. Using foreign relative experiences as references, China should adopt the mode combining the generalization mode with the listing mode to define the range of administrative monopoly.On the one hand, the main representative form of administrative monopoly should be listed specially, and the concrete regulations to regulate administrative monopoly behaviors in the domain of servicing industry should be added. And according to these rules, the antimonopoly law enforcement institutions should quickly judge representative administrative monopoly behaviors, and predict its legal result and increase the efficiency. On the other hand, according to relative authority data, the range of the industry about the national economy and the people’s livelihood should be specially defined, and the monopoly of these indu stries should be protected by laws, and the protective range and degree should also be defined, and for the behavior to illegally expand the monopoly range, corresponding punishment measures should be regulated.Through above analysis, the legal regulation of administrative monopoly behaviors in China just starts, and the relative rules about the administrative monopoly behaviors in Chinese Antimonopoly Law needs to be further perfected and crystallized, and the legal responsibilities about the administrative monopoly behaviors and the jurisdiction of law enforcement institution need to be further confirmed, and the regulation range of administration monopoly needs to be further expanded, and corresponding juridical relief approaches need to be gradually established. At the same time , the system reforms in the economic and political domain need to be further deepened, and the continual perfection of system reform can essentially reduce and stop the happening of administrative monopoly behaviors, and both the system reform and the legal regulation need to be strengthened, which is the essential way to solve the problem of administrative monopoly.从中国反垄断立法看行政垄断的法律规制Ling Wang山东科技大学法学院摘要：行政垄断打破了公正原则，并且具有较大的社会危害性。