Japanisches Kartellrecht—von aussen gesehen

Abstract

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image sizeAbstractThe common opinion about Japanese antitrust law is that its similarity to western antitrust laws is only superficial. The practice is said to be ruled by different cultural traditions of the country. The author shows that this practice can be explained by traditional concepts of antitrust theory.The purpose of Japanese antitrust law is, in contrast to monistic theories, defined by a pluralistic approach. This is in unison with most modern antitrust law systems. A rule of law is not as well developed as a rule of authority. This is the practice of some of the other western merger control systems as well (e. g. France and Great Britain). Japan adopted the American pattern of an independent competition agency. The purpose is to shield the application of the law from political influence. The Japanese Fair Trade Commission does not act in a political vacuum. But it has the possibility to protect itself against opportunistic political influence. The main difference between Japanese and western practice of antitrust law may be the different understanding of the concept of law. Law is understood as a pragmatic tool for the resolution of presently existing conflicts, rather than as a general principle which is to be applied consistently and which is achieved by a separation of state and society and by abstract and general criteria.