WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/WGTCP/W/235
26 June 2003
(03-3413)
Working Group on the Interaction
between Trade and Competition PolicyOriginal:  English
COMMUNICATION FROM KOREA
The following is the final text of a communication received from the Permanent Mission of
Korea, which was circulated as an advance copy for the Working Group's meeting of 26-27 May2003.
_______________
Peer Review in the Multilateral Framework on Competition Policy
I. INTRODUCTION
The recent international cartels have brought to light the extent of the harm done by cartels,
and how these cartels can have broad, international implications.  In many cases, developing countries
have been affected in particular. In addition, extraterritorial application of competition policy to curb
these cartels has sometimes led to jurisdictional conflicts, and legal restrictions have made evidence
gathering across borders difficult.  It is clear that some sort of international coordination and
cooperation is necessary in the competition policy arena.  Korea believes that, in order to effectively
address the above problems, the multilateral framework on competition policy should be introducedand that, to reinforce its enforcement, an effective and practical compliance mechanism is required.
Korea also believes that to effectively facilitate international cooperation, it would be most
effective for each country to adopt at least an anti-cartel law, if not a comprehensive competition law
and competition specific agency.  However, the following proposal does not presume the adoption ofa competition law as such, but only that there should be some institutional mechanisms to deal with
competition policy issues, befitting the socio-economic needs and traditions of a particular member.
Korea is of the view that peer review may be a realistic option to promote compliance (i.e.
compliance of core principles, hard-core cartels, voluntary cooperation and technical assistancestipulated in the Doha Development Agenda) by memb er countries. Peer review can also contribute to
improving the effectiveness of technical assistance to developing countries by enabling information-
sharing regarding competition law and policy.
In its previous submission to the Working Group (WT/WGTCP/W/225), Korea suggested the
implementation of peer review as a compliance mechanism in the WTO Competition Committee.  In
this proposal as a follow-up, specific implementati on guidelines of peer review under a multilateral
framework on competition policy in the WTO is  suggested, without prejudging Korea's future
position.WT/WGTCP/W/235
Page 2
II. PEER REVIEW IN THE MULTILATERAL FRAMEWORK ON COMPETITION
POLICY
Given that the WTO is an international organization based on binding rules, it would be more
meaningful for peer review in the WTO to be of binding nature than purely voluntary based as in
other international organizations, such as the OECD.  In the multilateral framework on competitionpolicy in the WTO, peer review should aim at helping to facilitate sharing of information and
experience between member countries, to enhance transparency in enforcement of competition law
and policy, thereby enhancing international cooperation.  Such a peer review process will have the
following features.
• Targeting all member countries
In principle, all member countries should be subject to peer review, thereby bolstering the role of peer
review as a compliance mechanism.  However, developing countries, which have not yet developedinstitutions or measures to deal with competition policy related issues in some way, or are in
beginning stages, should be given a grace period.
• Periodical review of implementation of the policy recommendations suggested in peer review
It could help promote compliance to review periodically the level and degree of implementation by
the member countries under review of the policy recommendations suggested by peer review
• Increasing the level of peer pressure
By publicizing final reports and information through publication and the Internet, compliance by peer
pressure could be strengthened
Korea has no objection to applying WTO dispute settlement mechanism to obligations in a
WTO competition agreement to complement the peer review process.  However, given wide
differences in competition policy related institutions and in the levels of experience with competition
policy, Korea is of the view that it may be more practical to begin with competition policy-specific
peer review.
III. GOAL AND STRUCTURE OF PEER REVIEW
A. G
OAL
1. Promoting Compliance
Facilitating and promoting the compliance by the member countries of the multilateral
framework on competition could be placed as the priority.
2. Information and Experience Sharing
By sharing and exchanging experience and related information of competition policy
enforcement, member countries could enhance the effectiveness of competition policy enforcement.
3. Technical Assistance
The process of peer review itself can help enhance the enforcement capability of developing
countries and the least developed countries, which have no or less experience in competition policy
implementation.WT/WGTCP/W/235
Page 3
B. BASIC FRAMEWORK
1. Investigation stage
At the investigation stage, a member country under review is required to draw up a report
including a brief overview of its competition law and policy enforcement, in accordance with a
standard preliminary review list, and to present it to the Secretariat.  The Secretariat draws up theSecretariat Report mainly based on the Government Report.
2. Examination stage
At this stage, all member countries in the Competition Committee discuss competition law
and policy enforcement of the given member country on the basis of the Government Report and the
Secretariat Report. Collecting and reflecting the opinions and recommendations from member
countries, the Secretariat produces the final report by revising the Secretariat Report.
3. Dissemination stage
Reflecting the discussion at the examination stage, the final report is drawn up and publicized.
By disclosing the government report, the final Secretariat report and minutes, transparency and
confidence in peer review could be enhanced
IV. RELATED ISSUES OF PEER REVIEW
A. S
ETTING THE PRIORITY OF THE COUNTRIES UNDER REVIEW
Considering peer review mechanism's positive effects upon technical assistance to developing
countries, it is desirable to select countries with sufficient experience in competition policyenforcement to be reviewed first. In this way,  more experienced countries can provide developing
countries with useful information on their experience in enforcing competition law and policy, which
could contribute to easing developing countries' uncertainty and anxiety about introduction and
enforcement of a domestic competition law and policy.
B. E
XAMINATION LISTS
Factors to be examined in the Peer Review should include at least core principles, hard-core
cartels, voluntary cooperation and technical assistance stipulated in the Doha Development Agenda.
C. RELATIONSHIP WITH TPRM
TPRM is a peer review mechanism that covers a wide range of trade policy of a given WTO
member. Therefore, its goal and scope are different from those of peer review on the competition lawand policy. TPRM aims to enhance transparency in overall trade policies and practices of member
countries.  A separate peer review in competition sector enables an effective competition-specific peer
review in a detailed manner.  It will also enhance transparency in competition law and policy
enforcement and promote compliance of a multilateral framework on competition policy.
V. CONCLUSION
Due to a wide gap in the experience in competition policy enforcement among member
countries, Korea believes that peer review is may be a realistic and applicable mechanism that will
promote compliance of a multilateral framework on competition policy by member countries.  InWT/WGTCP/W/235
Page 4
order to maximize the merits of peer review, such as compliance promotion, technical assistance and
information sharing, member countries' active participation in competition-specific peer review is
required. Korea is of the view that the peer  review mechanism can complement the non-binding
aspects of the voluntary cooperation system and reinforce the implementation of obligations set by the
multilateral framework.
__________