TIRANA, March 7 – Delays in court proceedings is one of the main barriers the country’s Competition Authority faces in dealing with competition issues such as cartels or abuse of dominant position, the watchdog says in an annual report.
The Authority says court appeals against its decisions and their prolonged examination are considerably curbing its efforts and interventions to reestablish free and efficient market competition.
The European Commission has also voiced concern over court delays on competition issues.
“The administrative capacity of the Albanian Competition Authority is sufficient and its staff has a good level of expertise. However, delays in court proceedings are too long and further efforts are needed to increase the availability and quality of training for judges on competition policy,” says the European Commission in its 2015 progress report on Albania.
The Competition Authority says administrative courts examined only a handful of appeals against decisions by the watchdog’s Competition Commission, delaying 20 cases for 2016.
The Authority investigated into several markets in 2015 when it identified several banned deals and abuse of dominant position in the oil, mobile, public procurement and electricity markets but did not impose any fines.
The Competition Authority significantly improved its debt collection in 2015 compared to 2014 when only around a quarter of fines imposed since its establishment as a watchdog a decade ago had been collected.
Data shows the Competition Authority has imposed a total of around 1 billion lek (€7.2 mln) in fines, but collected only around 470 million lek (€3.34 mln) with the assistance of debt collection agencies. Another 45 million lek (€320,000) or 5 percent of the total is being collected while the majority 522 million lek (€3.7 mln) or 50 percent of total debts remain uncollected because of no final court decision.
In its 2015 report, Lindita Milo, the head of the Authority, says cooperation with government agencies in getting a prior opinion of the Competition Authority in projects limiting market competition remains a challenge.
“The real impact of market interventions by this institution necessarily requires cooperation and taking into consideration its decisions and recommendations by the political class, the executive and regulatory entities,” says Lati.
Her comments come at a time when the government is considering several new controversial public-private partnerships while the authority has recommended market liberalization on several previous monopoly concessions.
