Acta Universitatis Carolinae Iuridica (AUCI) is the main journal of the Faculty of Law of Charles University. It has been published since 1954 and is one of the traditional law journals with a theoretical focus.
As a general law journal, it publishes longer studies and shorter articles on any relevant issues in legal theory and international, European and national law. AUCI also publishes material relating to current legislative issues. AUCI is a peer-reviewed journal and accepts submissions from both Czech and international authors. Contributions by foreign authors are published in their original language – Slovak, English, German, French.
AUCI is a theoretical journal for questions of state and law. It is published by Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Law, through Karolinum Press. It is published four times a year, the dates of publication can be found here.
Articles published in AUCI undergo an independent peer review process, which is anonymous on both sides. Reviewers from the field give their opinion on the scientific quality of the paper and the suitability of publication in the journal. In the case of comments, the opinion is sent back to the author with the possibility of revising the text (see Guidelines for Authors – Per Review Process for more details).
The AUCI journal (ISSN 0323-0619) is registered in the Czech National Bibliography (kept by the National Library of the Czech Republic) and in the Index to Foreign Legal Periodicals (kept by the American Association of Law Libraries). AUCI has been assigned a periodical registration number MK E 18585.
In 2021 the journal AUCI was the first journal of the Faculty of Law of Charles University to be included in the prestigious international database Scopus. This Elsevier database is the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature in the world. The editors of the journal expect from the inclusion in the elite Scopus database not only an increase in the readership of the journal, but also an increase in interest in the publication of papers by both Czech and foreign authors.
AUCI is an open journal and all its content is published both on the faculty website and on the Karolinum Press website. Access to it is free of charge. The homepage of AUCI is on the Karolinum Press website.
The AUCI journal uses the Creative Commons license: CC BY 4.0.
Long-term archiving of the digital content of the journal is provided by Portico.
AUC IURIDICA, Vol 67 No 1 (2021), 57–74
Jednotní stojíme, rozdělení padáme – význam spolupráce mezi agenturami při potírání bid-rigging konspirací
[United We Stand, Divided We Fall – The Role of Inter-Agency Cooperation in Enforcement of Bid Rigging Conspiracies]
Jaroslav Menčík
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14712/23366478.2021.4
published online: 12. 03. 2021
abstract
Public procurement plays an important role in economy of every country. The vast amounts of money awarded in public contracts, however, make public procurement extremely vulnerable to collusion among competitors and corruption of public officials. Although it is recognized that effective enforcement of these offences requires tight cooperation between competition agencies and other law enforcement authorities, there is still a lot of potential for improvement in many jurisdictions. The objective of this paper is to suggest key features of this cooperation which would facilitate effective catching of both colluding competitors and corrupt public officials involved in bid rigging schemes.
keywords: public procurement; collusion; bid rigging; corruption; cooperation
references (40)
1. AZEVÊDO, R. Remarks at Symposium on the Revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement [online]. 17.9.2015 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/spra_e/spra79_e.htm.
2. CALLIARI, M. - CRUZ, T. L. Tectonic Shifts in the Blink of an Eye: Antitrust, Anti-Corruption and Cooperation in Brazil Post-Petrobras. Competition Law International, 2015, Vol. 11, No. 2.
3. CARLIN, F. - HAANS, J. Bid-Rigging Demystified. The In-House Perspective, 2006, Vol. 2, No. 1.
4. CONNORS, W. Things to Know About Brazil's Corruption Scandal. The Wall Street Journal [online]. 2016 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://blogs.wsj.com/briefly/2016/03/04/5-things-to-know-about-brazils-corruption-scandal/.
5. Czech Office for the Protection of Competition. Historická sankce za kartel o rozdělení trhu [online]. 12.2.2007 [cit. 2019-08-18]. Available at: https://www.uohs.cz/cs/hospodarska-soutez/aktuality-z-hospodarske-souteze/418-historicka-sankce-za-kartel-o-rozdeleni-trhu.html.
6. DE ALMEIDA, M. A. - ZAGARIS, B. Political Capture in the Petrobras Corruption Scandal: the Sad Tale of an Oil Giant. Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, 2015, Vol. 39.
7. DOJ. An Antitrust Primer for Federal Law Enforcement Personnel [online]. 2005 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/atr/antitrust-primer-federal-law-enforcement-personnel-revised-april-2005.
8. DOJ. Criminal Enforcement: Trends Charts Through Fiscal Year 2015 [online]. 2015 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/atr/criminal-enforcement-fine-and-jail-charts.
9. DOJ. Price Fixing, Bid Rigging, and Market Allocation Schemes: What They Are and What to Look For [online]. 2015 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/atr/price-fixing-bid-rigging-and-market-allocation-schemes.
10. DOJ. Justice Department Announces Procurement Collusion Strike Force: a Coordinated National Response to Combat Antitrust Crimes and Related Schemes in Government Procurement, Grant and Program Funding [online]. 5.11.2019 [cit. 2019-11-30]. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-procurement-collusion-strike-force-coordinated-national-response.
11. European Commission. EU Anti-Corruption Report [online]. 2014 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/e-library/documents/policies/organized-crime-and-human-trafficking/corruption/docs/acr_2014_en.pdf.
12. European Commission. Special Eurobarometer 397 Corruption Report [online]. 2014 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_397_en.pdf.
13. FOX, E. M. - HEALEY, D. When the State Harms Competition - The Role for Competition Law. Antitrust Law Journal, 2014, Vol. 79, No. 3. CrossRef
14. GIANNINO, M. The Italian Lazio Administrative Court upholds almost all the findings of the Competition Authority of a collusion in public contracts procurement (School Cleaning Services). e-Competitions Bulletin, November 2016, Art. N° 81976, October 14, 2016.
15. GIANNINO, M. Collusion in Public Contracts Procurement: Suppliers of School Cleaning Services Fined for Bid Rigging (Italy). Journal of European Competition Law & Practice, 2016. CrossRef
16. GOLDBERG, P. - ANDERSON, M. - AUBERTINE, A. Bid Rigging Detection in Government Construction Contracts [online]. 2004 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.osbar.org/_docs/sections/antitrust/attr_cle_bid_rigging.pdf.
17. International Competition Network. ICN Anti-cartel Enforcement Template (Brazil) [online]. 2017 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://en.cade.gov.br/anti-cartel-enforcement-template.pdf.
18. LAMBERT, A. - SONIN, K. Corruption and Collusion in Procurement Tenders. In: Center for Economic and Financial Research [online]. 2003 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.cefir.ru/papers/WP36.pdf.
19. LENGWILER, Y. - WOLFSTETTER, E. Bid Rigging: an Analysis of Corruption in Auctions. Discussion paper No. 39, May 2005 [online]. 2005 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.sfbtr15.de/uploads/media/39.pdf.
20. LEWIS, D. Bid Rigging and its interface with corruption. In: GAL, M. S. et al. The Economic Characteristics of Developing Jurisdictions: Their Implications for Competition Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2015.
21. LUPI, M. Bid Rigging Practices Aimed at Manipulating Consip's Tender in the Market of Cleaning Services for Public Institutions (I785). Italian Antitrust Review, Vol. 3, No. 1, 2016.
22. MOSUNOVA, N. An Examination of Criminalization of Russia's Anti-Bid Rigging Policy. Russian Law Journal, 2015, Vol. 3, No. 4. CrossRef
23. MURRAY, S. B. Bid-Rigging Remains Focus of DOJ Antitrust Criminal Enforcement: Businesses Need to Ensure Their Compliance. The Metropolitan Corporate Counsel, 2013, January.
24. OECD. Fighting bid rigging in public procurement: Report on implementing the OECD Recommendation [online]. 2016 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/Fighting-bid-rigging-in-public-procurement-2016-implementation-report.pdf.
25. OECD. Bribery in Public Procurement: Methods, Actors and Counter-measures [online]. 2007 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/investment/anti-bribery/anti-briberyconvention/44956834.pdf.
26. OECD. Roundtable on Collusion and Corruption in Public Procurement [online]. 2010 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/competition/cartels/46235884.pdf.
27. OECD. Recommendation of the OECD Council on Fighting Bid Rigging in Public Procurement [online]. 2012 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/RecommendationOnFightingBidRigging2012.pdf.
28. OECD. Recommendation of the Council concerning Effective Action against Hard Core Cartels [online]. 1998 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/daf/competition/2350130.pdf.
29. OECD. Fighting Corruption and Promoting Competition: Contribution from the Czech Republic [online]. 2014 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/competition/globalforum/fighting-corruption-and-promoting-competition.htm.
30. OECD. Fighting Corruption and Promoting Competition: Contribution from Sweden [online]. 2014 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/competition/globalforum/fighting-corruption-and-promoting-competition.htm.
31. OECD. Fighting Corruption and Promoting Competition: Contribution from Canada [online]. 2014 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/competition/globalforum/fighting-corruption-and-promoting-competition.htm.
32. OECD. Fighting Corruption and Promoting Competition: Contribution from Latvia [online]. 2014 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: https://www.oecd.org/competition/globalforum/fighting-corruption-and-promoting-competition.htm.
33. PECMAN, J. Co-operation between anti-corruption and competition authorities. In: Government of Canada - Media centre [online]. 2016 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb-bc.nsf/eng/04114.html.
34. PENTON, K. Brazil Probes $8.9B Bid-Rigging Plot For Petrobras Deals. In: Law360 [online]. 2015 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://www.law360.com/articles/741619/brazil-probes-8-9b-bid-rigging-plot-for-petrobras-deals
35. UNCTAD. Competition laws' prohibitions of anti-competitive State acts and measures. Volume 1: Summary of answers to questionnaire [online]. 2015 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/ResearchPartnership/TheState.aspx.
36. UNCTAD. Competition laws' prohibitions of anti-competitive State acts and measures. Volume 2: Appendix of sample statutory excerpt [online]. 2015 [cit. 2019-04-18]. Available at: http://unctad.org/en/Pages/DITC/CompetitionLaw/ResearchPartnership/TheState.aspx.
37. WEISHAAR, S. E. Cartels, Competition and Public Procurement: Law and Economics Approaches to Bid Rigging. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2013. CrossRef
38. WHELAN, P. The Criminalization of European Cartel Enforcement: Theoretical, Legal, and Practical Challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. CrossRef
39. WHISH, R. - BAILEY, D. Competition Law. 8th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. CrossRef
40. ZUBERI, S. J. The High Cost of Controlling Corruption: the Achilles' Heel of the OECD-DAC Methodology for Assessment of National Procurement Systems. Public Contract Law Journal. 2010, Vol. 40, No. 1.
Jednotní stojíme, rozdělení padáme – význam spolupráce mezi agenturami při potírání bid-rigging konspirací is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
230 x 157 mm
periodicity: 4 x per year
print price: 65 czk
ISSN: 0323-0619
E-ISSN: 2336-6478
