串通招投标行为的反垄断法规制路径:域外国家的比较与借鉴  

Regulation Path of Anti-monopoly Law on Collusion in Bidding:Comparison and Reference of Countries

作　　者：苏丽芳[1] SU Lifang

机构地区：[1]武汉铁路职业技术学院,湖北武汉430205

出　　处：《国际商务研究》2022年第6期72-79,共8页International Business Research

摘　　要：串通招投标行为寄生于招投标之中。各国普遍认为,串通招投标行为属于限制竞争的垄断协议,应在反垄断法框架下对该种行为进行规制。在串通招投标规制原则上各国呈现差异化,主要表现为美国和欧盟的“合理原则”“本身违法原则”与日本的“准当然违法原则”。在不同规制原则下,各国制定了符合本国国情的宽恕制度、立法体系和制裁制度。我国可借鉴域外反垄断法规制串通招投标行为的经验,为串通招投标行为反垄断协议认定、宽恕制度完善和法律责任体系构建进行适应性调整。The purpose of the bidding system is to realize an open,fair and just market competition mechanism.It is found from the investigation of foreign countries that bid-rigging is generally considered to be a monopoly agreement that restricts competition and should be regulated under the framework of anti-monopoly law.However,in the principle of collusive bidding regulations,countries have shown differences,which are mainly manifested in the reasonable principle and self-illegal principle of the United States and the European Union,and the quasi-of-course illegality principle of Japan.Under different regulatory principles,countries have formulated forgiveness systems,legislative systems,and sanctions systems that suit their national conditions.China can reasonably draw lessons from the experience of foreign anti-monopoly law in regulating bid-rigging behavior,so as to make adaptive adjustments to the identification of anti-monopoly agreement,the improvement of the forgiveness system and the construction of legal liability system for bid-rigging behavior.

关 键 词：串通招投标 反垄断法 规制 

分 类 号：DF4[政治法律—经济法学]