SUMMARIZED GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROGRAM MEASURES IN TERMS OF DIRECTIONS, PROBLEMS AND EXPECTED STRATEGIC RESULTS

Problem: 2.2.5. Insufficient information about the activities of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine and the fact that it is vested with a number of discretionary powers complicate public control over its activities and cause a high level of corruption risks. There is no effective program to mitigate the liability of cartel members who have reported the cartel and provided evidence.

Progress in the implementation of measures as of 03.07.2024
measures, the implementation of which as of 31.03.2024
1 3
4
Partially implemented In progress
Measures implemented (fully and partially) - 1 ( 25%)
Download the table
№ Name of the ESR Name of the measure The main implementer Monitoring results (latest) Status % of measures implemented (fully and partially) Evaluation of achievement of ESR Середній рівень ОСР
Direction 2.2. State regulation of the economy
25% 1 / 4
0.0%
Problem 2.2.5. Insufficient information about the activities of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine and the fact that it is vested with a number of discretionary powers complicate public control over its activities and cause a high level of corruption risks. There is no effective program to mitigate the liability of cartel members who have reported the cartel and provided evidence.
25% 1 / 4
0.0%
1.1 ОСР 2.2.5.1. The Antimonopoly Committee operates according to the principles of transparency, predictability, and legal certainty; the level of corruption risks in its activities has significantly decreased owing to unimpeded but regulated public access to discussions at the stage of announcement of decisions, draft regulations, plans and results of the Antimonopoly Committee’s activities 2.2.5.1.1 Drafting and submitting to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine a draft law proposing to stipulate: 1) that meetings of the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine, administrative boards of the Antimonopoly Committee, administrative boards of territorial offices of the Antimonopoly Committee shall be public, except where such meetings are convened to discuss issues containing classified information; 2) the obligation of the Antimonopoly Committee to annually approve and publish the action plan for the following year on its official web portal no later than December 31; 3) the obligation of the Antimonopoly Committee to annually approve and publish a report on the results of implementation of the action plan for the previous year on its official web portal no later than March 15; 4) the obligation of the Antimonopoly Committee to maintain a single open State Register of Business Entities Held Accountable for Committing a Violation in the Form of Concerted Anticompetitive Actions Involving the Distortion of the Outcomes of Competitive Bidding Processes, in the manner prescribed by the Antimonopoly Committee National Agency on Corruption Prevention Implementation of the measure has started on time In progress
0% 0 / 1
0.0%
2.1 ОСР 2.2.5.2. The legislation obligates the Antimonopoly Committee to publish on its official website: recommendations issued to government agencies, local self-government bodies, organizations, business entities, associations; the complete list of cases being examined by the Antimonopoly Committee along with the regularly updated details of each case involving a violation of the requirements of legislation on the protection of economic competition, specifically the gist of the case, the general stages of examination 2.2.5.2.1 Drafting and submitting to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine a draft law proposing to define: 1) the obligation of the Antimonopoly Committee to publish on its official website within the time frame prescribed by this law the recommendations (other than classified information) issued to government agencies, local self-government bodies, organizations, business entities, associations; 2) the obligation of the Antimonopoly Committee and its territorial offices to publish on its official website within the time frame prescribed by this law the complete list of cases being examined by the Antimonopoly Committee along with the regularly updated details of each case involving a violation of the requirements of legislation on the protection of economic competition, specifically the gist of the case, the relevant state commissioner, the examination time frame, the general stages of examination, and the grounds for prolonging the term of examination of the case; 3) the obligation of the Antimonopoly Committee and its territorial offices to publish on its official website within the time frame prescribed by this law the texts of clarifications adopted and issued by the Antimonopoly Committee; 4) the obligation of the Antimonopoly Committee and its territorial offices to publish on its official website within the time frame prescribed by this law the information about the proposed concentrations (the names and legal form of organization of the parties to the concentration, the nature of the proposed actions); 5) the obligation of the Antimonopoly Committee and its territorial offices to publish on its official website within the time frame prescribed by this law the unified open State Register of Business Entities Held Accountable for Committing a Violation in the Form of Concerted Anticompetitive Actions Involving the Distortion of the Outcomes of Competitive Bidding Processes. National Agency on Corruption Prevention Implementation of the measure has started on time In progress
0% 0 / 1
0.0%
3.1 ОСР 2.2.5.3. The excessive level of discretion in the exercise of powers by the Antimonopoly Committee has been eliminated, in particular when it comes to determining: the commencement of examination of a case involving a violation of the requirements of legislation on the protection of economic competition, the estimated timeframe for consideration of such a case and, if necessary, the possibility of extending this timeframe with appropriate justification; the timeframe for verifying information about illegally obtained government aid; ways to improve the mechanism for appointing and replacing state commissioners responsible for examining cases involving violations of the legislation on protection of economic competition, taking into account their professional qualities, experience, impartiality, independence, legality and validity of their decisions; ways to improve approaches to determining the amount of the fine and the procedure for calculating the fine imposed for violations of the legislation on protection of economic competition 2.2.5.3.1 Drafting and submitting to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine a draft law proposing to eliminate the excessive level of discretion in the exercise of the powers of the Antimonopoly Committee, particularly by: 1) establishing the maximum time frame for examining a case involving violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition for each kind of violations; 2) establishing an exhaustive list of grounds and the procedure for extending the time frame for examining a case involving violations of the legislation on the protection of economic competition, as well as the maximum amount of time by which the time frame for examination of this case can be extended; 3) establishing a transparent and nondiscriminatory procedure for limiting the time frame during which the parties to the case can review the case files, as well as the procedure for determining the relevant time frame; 4) providing for the possibility of (and defining the conditions for) suspension of case proceedings for the duration of examination of violations listed in Clauses 13-15 of Article 50 of the Law of Ukraine On the Protection of Economic Competition, which commenced as part of the examination of the relevant case, as well as for the duration of examination of other cases (involving obstructions created during inspections, failure to appear when summoned by agencies of the Committee to offer explanations); 5) obligating the Antimonopoly Committee—where the Committee has looked into a complaint about unlawful government aid or misuse of government aid and has decided against initiating a case involving government aid—to provide the complainant with exhaustive and substantiated information about the grounds and motives for this decision; 6) establishing the procedure for designating and replacing state commissioners responsible for examining cases involving violations of legislation on the protection of economic competition or cases involving government aid; 7) providing for the right of the parties to the case to motion for disqualification of state commissioners responsible for investigating the cases, and establishing the list of conditions to be met in order for such motions for disqualification to be granted; 8) setting forth the principles of determining the amounts of fines within the limits established by legislation on the protection of economic competition; 9) stipulating that the procedure for determining the amount of fines shall be determined via a bylaw normative legal act and shall provide for the determination of the base fine amount for each respondent as well as subsequent adjustment of the base fine amount bearing in mind the severity, duration, and scale of the violation, and any aggravating or mitigating circumstances. National Agency on Corruption Prevention Implementation of the measure has started on time In progress
0% 0 / 1
0.0%
4.1 ОСР 2.2.5.4. To encourage disclosure of cartels, the mechanism of exemption or mitigation of liability of cartel members who report the cartel to the Antimonopoly Committee and provide relevant evidence has been improved on the basis of best practices of the European Union 2.2.5.4.1 Drafting and submitting to the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine a draft law proposing to improve the mechanism of exemption from or mitigation of liability and stipulate that: 1) in order to be exempted from liability for concerted anticompetitive actions, the party involved in such actions must notify the Antimonopoly Committee sooner than the other parties involved in such actions about such concerted anticompetitive actions and submit an application seeking exemption from liability, which must be submitted before the issuance of the preliminary conclusions in this case; 2) the person who engaged in concerted anticompetitive actions and submitted the application seeking exemption from liability to the Antimonopoly Committee sooner than the other parties involved in such actions shall be fully exempted from liability for committee such concerted anticompetitive actions, if this person: has disclosed such concerted anticompetitive actions to the Antimonopoly Committee; has discontinued their involvement in the concerted anticompetitive actions no later than the date of submission of the application seeking exemption from liability, except where such involvement in the anticompetitive actions is needed in order to ensure the integrity of examination of the case; has cooperated with agencies of the Antimonopoly Committee; has presented the relevant evidence which the Antimonopoly Committee did not possess; 3) any party involved in concerted anticompetitive actions may file an application with the Antimonopoly Committee seeking mitigation of liability by presenting the relevant evidence of the commission of concerted anticompetitive actions, which is of material significance for the issuance of a decision in this case and which the Antimonopoly Committee did not possess, as long as this party has disclosed such concerted anticompetitive actions to the Antimonopoly Committee; has suspended their involvement in the concerted anticompetitive actions no later than the date of submission of the application seeking exemption from liability; has cooperated with agencies of the Antimonopoly Committee; 4) the grounds and procedure for exemption from liability or mitigation of liability shall be established by the Antimonopoly Committee; 5) the procedure for exemption from liability or mitigation of liability shall define the procedure for documenting the submission of applications seeking exemption from liability or mitigation of liability, and the requirements for the format of such applications; 6) the information that exposes concerted anticompetitive actions and is of material significance of the issuance of a decision in the case shall include, in particular, the details of the applicant; information about all known parties involved in the concerted anticompetitive actions; a detailed description of the purpose and nature of the concerted anticompetitive actions; information about the boundaries of the commodity market affected by them; the market share covered by them; a description of contacts and interactions among the parties involved in the concerted anticompetitive actions; information about evidence of the concerned anticompetitive conduct; 7) officials and officers of the Antimonopoly Committee are prohibited from disclosing information about the applicant and the information reported by them; 8) the Antimonopoly Committee shall examine cases involving exemption from liability or mitigation of liability as well as inform the applicants about the decision to apply (or deny the application) of the program of exemption from liability or mitigation of liability within the time frame established by the Antimonopoly Committee; 9) the persons exempted from liability shall not be subject to the requirements of the Law of Ukraine On Public Procurement pertaining to the prohibition from participating in the procurement process due to the commission of concerted anticompetitive actions, except for the persons who repeatedly engaged in concerted anticompetitive actions; 10) in case of mitigation of liability, the fine amount shall be reduced by the agency of the Antimonopoly Committee compared to the previously calculated fine amount depending on the sequence in which the other parties involved in concerted anticompetitive actions have divulged information that exposes the concerted anticompetitive actions and is of material significance for the issuance of decisions in the case (by up to 50 percent for the first person, by up to 30 percent for the second person, and by up to 20 percent for the other parties). Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine The measure was implemented on time, but partially Partially implemented
100% 1 / 1
0.0%