an overview on the application of malaysian competition ... hamzah, safinaz... · web viewmalaysian...

2012 Cambridge Business & Economics Conference ISBN : 9780974211428

An Overview On The Application of Malaysian Competition Act 2010 In Air Transport Industry

NORADURA HAMZAHSAFINAZ MOHD HUSSIEN

MAHMUD ZUHDI MOHD NOR

Law FacultyUniversiti Kebangsaan Malaysia

43760 Bangi,Selangor

MALAYSIA

Phone No: +690196580667 (Noradura Hamzah)E-mail: [email protected]

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

1


An Overview On The Application of Malaysian Competition Act 2010 In Air Transport Industry

NORADURA HAMZAHSAFINAZ MOHD HUSSIEN

MAHMUD ZUHDI MOHD NORLaw Faculty

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia43760 Bangi,

SelangorMALAYSIA

ABSTRACT

Competition Law is a new branch of law in Malaysian legal system. Malaysian Competition Act 2010 (CA 2010) was gazette IN 2010 and is enforce starting from January 1, 2012. Section 3(1) CA 2010 provides that CA 2010 applies to all commercial activities both, within and outside Malaysia. Schedule 2 of CA 2010 listed multimedia and telecommunication as well as energy sector being sectors excluded from CA 2010. Since there is no exclusion and exemption, CA 2010 is enforce in the air service sector. Competition in air service sector in Malaysia is very unique compared to other domestic transportation sectors. The framework in air services sector is divided in accordance with its route of services offered i.e international and domestic. Both services have different framework. The international air services rely on the international regime underpinning the principle of state sovereignty over its air space. On the other hand, the domestic air service is governed by policy and regulation. However, the competition framework in air services is incompatible with the provision of CA 2010. It is opposed to the objective of CA 2010,that encourages efficiency, innovation and entrepreneurship, which promotes competitive prices, improvement in the quality of products and services and wider choices for consumers. Therefore, this paper aim to provides an overview on the framework of competition in Malaysian air transport sector and the application of CA 2010 in order to indentify the anti competitive conduct exercise under the current framework and to identify the anti competitive conduct recognized by law. This study will also look at the difference between the frameworks of air services sector with the provisions of the CA 2010. This is to prove that the existing framework of the air transport sector is unclear, inadequate and not suitable to promote efficient competition. Hence it is an impediment to CA 2010.

KEY WORD : Competiton Law, Malaysian Competition Act 2010, Competition In Airline Sector

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

2


INTRODUCTION

The system of modern competition law is a world phenomenon. It started with the enactment

of Sherman Act 1890 in the United States of America and later spread out through out many

countries in the world. Till date there are about 120 systems of competition law in the world.

It is evidence on the importance of the system to world economic development1.

On the 10th Malaysian Plan, Malaysian acknowledge that healthy competition is

needed to make the economy more efficient and dynamic2. Therefore, Malaysian Competition

Act 2010 (CA 2010) was introduced to provide a regulatory framework against market

manipulation and cartel practices that may affect market efficiency.

CA applies to all services sectors including the air transport industry3. Prior to the

enforcement of CA 2011, competition in the domestic transport and air services sector are

affected by regulations imposed under three ministries, namely the Ministry of Transport

(MOT), the Ministry of Works (MOW) and the Ministry of Entrepreneur Development

(MET)4. However with the existence of CA 2011, the services sectors are now bound by the

rules of competition in the CA 2010.

1 Sherman Anti-Trust Act (1890), Brief Info…., http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=51 2 Portal Rasmi Unit Perangcangan Ekonomi, Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Dokumen,Rancangan Malaysia Ke10, http://www.epu.gov.my/html/themes/epu/html/RMKE10/rmke10_english.html (16 February 2012)3 Competition Act 2010, Section 3(1)4 Cassey Lee, 2004, Competition Policy In Malaysia, Centre on Paper Series, Paper No. 68, Institute for Development Policy and Management, University of Manchester,Regulation and Competition, http://www.competition-regulation.org.uk/publications/working_papers/WP68.pdf (16 February 2012)

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

3

http://www.competition-regulation.org.uk/publications/working_papers/WP68.pdf

http://www.epu.gov.my/html/themes/epu/html/RMKE10/rmke10_english.html

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=51



The air services sector however is unique compared to other transport services sector.

Air transport sector is divided into two categories that is domestic and international services.

On the hand, other domestic transportation such as buses, taxis, trains and light rail freight

train only offered services within one jurisdiction. These differentiate the legal framework of

both the different transport services.

Prior to January 1, 2012, the Malaysian air transport services industry has no proper

legal framework on competition. Competition among airlines is based on the policy issued by

government. This is because, since independence, the economic sectors in Malaysia have

been regulated primarily at the sectoral level5. Economic regulation in these sectors mainly

took the form of government control over entry conditions (via licenses and permits) and in

some sectors, prices6. However, beginning January 1, 2012, the air transport industry in

Malaysia is subject to the general application of the Competition Act 2010.

Generally, the competition framework of the air services sector in Malaysia is divided

into two; based on the types of services offered by airlines, i.e the international and domestic

services. Framework of international air services sector in Malaysia depends on international

conventions to which Malaysia ratify. The main convention underpinning the framework of

international services is the 1944 Chicago Convention. However, the application of this

convention is not visualized into the form of legislative drafting. Malaysia also adopted the

rules and regulation advised by International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and

International Air Transport Association (AITA) to which Malaysia is a member. Meanwhile,

the domestic frameworks rely on the regulation and related policy.

5 ibid6 ibid

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

4


The basic principle underlying the 1944 Convention International Civil Aviation

(Chicago Convention) is the principle of sovereignty of a state's airspace7. It justifies the right

of a country to protect its airspace from encroachment by foreign aircraft. For this purposes,

schedule air services is permitted to operate into Malaysia if it is covered by either an Air

Services Agreement, a license issued in accordance with Civil Aviation Regulation 1996 or

other aeronautical arrangement8. The requirement mention above had limits market entry to

Malaysian air services industry. This principle is fundamentally contrary to competition

objective under CA 2010.

The competition process intended by CA 2010 should encourages efficiency,

innovation and entrepreneurship, which promotes competitive prices, improvement in the

quality of products and services and wider choices for consumers. Therefore, balance

cooperation between the government and the air services industry is essential to the

enjoyment of trade and economic prosperity. At the same time they need to work together to

protect their national territory and to liberalize air services between the countries.

However, the policy introduced by the government is incompatible with the provision

of CA 2010. Existing policy also minimize the solution to the issues that arise in global and

domestic competition. The lack of a clear competition provision for the international and

domestic air services in Malaysia may not cause any significant problems before. In fact,

imbalances and differences in the underlying principle of the framework in air transport

sector with CA 2010 was never been questioned.

7 International Convention On Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention) 1944, Article 18 Malaysia Integrated Aeronautical Information Package, AIP Malaysia, Gen. 1.2 Entry, Transit And Departure of Aircraft, para 1.1

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

5


However, with the enforcement of the CA 2010, the application of international

conventions, ICAO or IATA rules and regulation and, domestic policies and regulations are

now is barrier to the successfulness of CA 2010. The unclear policies have hindered the

process of more fair competition. Furthermore, the limited process of liberalization and

deregulation policies in aviation sectors will cause an imbalance in the implementation of CA

2010 in Malaysia.

Therefore, this study will look at the Malaysian air services sector’s framework in

order to indentify the anti competitive conduct exercise under the policy. This study will also

look at the provisions of the CA 2010 to identify anti competitive conduct recognized by law.

This study will also look at the difference between the frameworks of aviation sector with the

provisions of the CA 2010. This is to prove that the existing framework of the aviation sector

is unclear, inadequate and not suitable to promote efficient competition. Hence it is an

impediment to CA 2010.

It is important to identify the differences and shortcomings in the present framework

to ensure the success of CA 2010. Moreover, an empirical study in this field in Malaysia has

yet to be found. Therefore, this study contributes to the body of knowledge in this field and it

could be a stepping-stone to other relevant studies.

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

6


THE BEGINNING OF COMPETITION AS IN 2006 AIR TRANSPORT

SERVICES RATIONALIZATION

Since the earlier year, the air services industry in Malaysia is dominated entirely by Malaysia

Airlines (MAS) which handles flights on behalf of Malaysia Airlines Bhd (PNB)9. However,

on March 27, 2006, the then, Prime Minister has announced a restructuring plan for its

domestic flight services10. This restructuring plan had affected the dominant position of MAS.

The air services restructuring plan or batter phrase, as the rationalization of domestic

aviation sector was effective from August 1, 200611. It is made in accordance with the

emergence of Air Asia as the new air service operators in the domestic air transport industry

in Malaysia.

The rationalization process has been demonstrated ambiguity and confusion in the

policy formulated. It’s is a clear evidence to prove the government's intervention in the

competitive landscape of domestic aviation sector. The proportion of market reflected this

sentiment. Market was split into two different segmentation knows as market of routes based

and market based on the type of services offered.

9 Khairuddin Md Amin, 2006, MAS yakin catat untung – Di bawah penyusunan semula sektor penerbangan domestik, Utusan Malaysia Online, 29 Mac, http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2006&dt=0329&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Muka_Hadapan&pg=mh_01.htm (16 February 2012)10 Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi, 2006, Prime Minister Press Statement, Kenyataan Media Mengenai Rasionalsasi Sektor Perkhidmatan Penerbangan Domestik, Pejabat Perdana Menteri, Putrajaya, 27 March, http://www.abdullah.cdc.net.my/malaysia/speeches/2006/2006-03-27.php (13 February 2012)11 Khairuddin Md Amin, 2006, MAS yakin catat untung – Di bawah penyusunan semula sektor penerbangan domestik, Utusan Malaysia Online, 29 Mac, http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2006&dt=0329&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Muka_Hadapan&pg=mh_01.htm (16 February 2012)

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

7

http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2006&dt=0329&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Muka_Hadapan&pg=mh_01.htm


http://www.abdullah.cdc.net.my/malaysia/speeches/2006/2006-03-27.php




Market for the type of route has been sub-divided into two main sub-market-based;

comprising domestic trunk routes and domestic non-trunk route. Determination of major

trunk routes is based on international connectivity and business traffic12. It focus on the

ability of connecting flights from domestic routes to international routes and business-class

level. For that purpose, three airports had been appointed as a hub for major domestic routes.

Airports involved are the KL International Airport (KLIA), Kuching International Airport

and Kota Kinabalu International Airport. Nineteen sets of main domestic routes had also been

identified.

The market for fair competition is basically seen in the context of the market in

nineteen major trunk routes discussed above. In this context, competition exists when MAS

and Air Asia are allowed to operate in concert for the whole route. Both air transport

operators are also given freedom to determine their own capacity, frequency and type of

aircraft used13. This situation should be able to create a climate of healthy competition

between the two.

However, rationalization had also limit the competition which should exist in the

domestic trunk routes. This is because the market for all nineteen domestic trunk routes have

been arranged and sub-divided into two distinct market categories. The market is now seen in

terms of types of services rendered14. MAS had been instructed to offer premium-class flights

12 Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi, 2006, Prime Minister Press Statement, Kenyataan Media Mengenai Rasionalsasi Sektor Perkhidmatan Penerbangan Domestik, Pejabat Perdana Menteri, Putrajaya, 27 March, http://www.abdullah.cdc.net.my/malaysia/speeches/2006/2006-03-27.php (13 February 2012), para 2.i.a13 ibid, para 2.ii14 ibid, para 2.iii

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

8



and Air Asia is offering low-fare service15. The purposed of market segmentation based on

services rendered was intended to ensure healthy competition to create an efficient air service

and affordable in the domestic aviation sector16.

To achieve this goal, MAS is subjected to a price limitation set by government. MAS

is not allowed to set fares below full economy class fares available17. The pre-conditions are

meant to ensure the market remains on the type of services provided.

At the same time, the domestic airline industry has allowed Air Asia to have exclusive

rights to operate domestic non-trunk routes18. Air Asia became a dominant force and form a

monopoly to dominated all ninety-six domestic non-trunk routes without any competition.

The route also includes flight routes to social services in rural Sabah and Sarawak which was

taken over from MAS19.

Rationalization plan for domestic air route services as discussed above was intended

to ensure competitiveness between MAS and Air Asia. However, the policy is quite vague

and not consistent with the principles of competition. It is because market as the main

element in competition had not been identify. Therefore, relevant market has not been

clarified.

Market definition probably refers to the distribution of market sector inclusive of

domestic trunk routes and domestic non-trunk air routes. It can also be viewed in the context

of market-based type of service offered consisting of premium service and low fares. In this 15 ibid, para 2.iii16 ibid, para 417 ibid, para 2.iii18 ibid, para 2.ii19 ibid, para 2.vi

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

9


context the service type is not made clear whether it amounts to a market definition or merely

re-branding.

It can be said that in the event that market was define based to its diversion between

domestic trunk routes and domestic non-trunk routes, therefore the air services industry is

promoting fair competition when allowing MAS and Air Asia to compete in all domestic

trunk routes. However, routes based market definition is not balanced because competition

exists only in domestic trunk route. There is an imbalance in the competition when

rationalization allows dominance and monopoly of the market for the domestic trunk routes

by giving exclusive rights to Air Asia in all non-trunk route.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF COMPETATIVE CONDUCTS FROM THE YEAR

2006 TO 2011

Rationalization packaged done in 2006 as discussed above, has seen that MAS had surrender

its rural air services (RAS) in Sabah and Sarawak to Air Asia. Air Asia operates RAS via

FAX. However, in March 2007, Air Asia had withdrawn its RAS service on grounds of

focusing on its long-haul low-cost airline services20.

In 2007, MAS set up a budget airline known as Firefly21. Firefly focuses in offering

domestic air services via its two main hubs i.e International Airport in Penang and Subang

Airport and three secondary hubs including Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA),

Kota Kinabalu International Airport and Senai International Airport.

20 Alan Ting, 2007, MASWINGS Ambil Alih Perkhidmatan Udara Luar Bandar Secara Berperingkat, Bernama, 8 Jun, http://www.kpdnkk.bernama.com/newsBm.php?id=266471& (16 Februari 2012)21 Company Profile, http://firefly.com.my/about/company-profile (14 Februari 2012)

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

10

http://firefly.com.my/about/company-profile

http://www.kpdnkk.bernama.com/newsBm.php?id=266471&



However, following the MAS latest network rationalization program announced in the

end of 2011, Firefly has restricted its services offerings in all domestic routes from its main

hub22. The Malaysian air services industry is now been introduced with another segmentation

of market, based to the type of aircraft. The Firefly is now restricting their market operation

based to the types of aircraft offered, i.e the ATR 72-500 turboprop23.

Meanwhile, between the years 2007 to 2011, there was growth in the development of

air services industry in Malaysia. Air Asia through AirAsia X had gained access to many

international routes. Almost 90% of AirAsia X international routes is said to has overlap with

MAS24.

Further, by the end of 2011, MAS and Air Asia has agreed to a comprehensive

corroboration framework (CCF)25. Under the CCF, shareholders of the two air services

operators swap each other shares in both airlines. The outcome of the CCF shows that both

shareholders are now hold interest in both airlines.

22 Shahrizan Salian, 2011, MAS ambil alih operasi jet Firefly, Berita Harian Online, 19 Oktober, http://www.bharian.com.my/articles/MASambilalihoperasijetFirefly/Article/print_html (14 February 2012)23 ibid24 Tengku Datuk Azmil Zahruddin, 2011, MAS and AirAsia X should co-pilot efforts to achieve nation’s aspiration, The Star Online, Saturday May 1, http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/5/1/business/6168011 (16 February 2012)25 Wong Sai Wan, 2011, Share swap deal: AirAsia's Fernandes to gain 20% stake in MAS, The Star Online, Sunday August 7, http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/8/7/nation/9255271&sec=nation (16 February)

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

11

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/8/7/nation/9255271&sec=nation

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/5/1/business/6168011

http://www.bharian.com.my/articles/MASambilalihoperasijetFirefly/Article/print_html



The air service framework does not make clear as to whether the formation of Firefly,

the overlapping routes between AirAsia X and MAS and the CCF between MAS and Air

Asia as highlighted above create competition among the air services operators or its infringe

the process of competition.

On the other hand, CA 2010 (which at the time of rationalization had been gazette but

yet be enforced) through Malaysian Competition Commission (MyCC) establish a test for

market definition and relevant market to settle these issue26. Market under CA 2010 refer to a

market in Malaysia or in any part of Malaysia, and when used in relation to any goods or

services, includes a market for those goods or services and other goods or services that are

substitutable for, or otherwise competitive with, the first-mentioned goods or services27.

Relevant market for the purposed of CA 2010 refers to identifying all the close

substitutes for the product under investigation28. In order to indentify relevant market, MyCC

introduce the test of ‘Hypothetical Monopolist Test’ ("HMT”)29. HMT define relevant market

as the smallest group of products (in a geographical area) that a hypothetical monopolist

controlling that product group (in that area) could profitably sustain a price above the

‘competitive’ price i.e. a price that is at least a small but significant amount above the

competitive price30.

26 Malaysian Competition Commission, Guideline of Market Definition, http://www.mycc.gov.my/272_216_216/Web/WebPage/Guidelines-on-Market-Definition/Guidelines-on-Market-Definition.html (17 February 2012)27 Competition Act 2010, Section 228 Malaysian Competition Commission, Guideline of Market Definition, http://www.mycc.gov.my/272_216_216/Web/WebPage/Guidelines-on-Market-Definition/Guidelines-on-Market-Definition.html (17 February 2012) para 1.429 ibid, para 1.630 ibid, para 2.2

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

12

http://www.mycc.gov.my/272_216_216/Web/WebPage/Guidelines-on-Market-Definition/Guidelines-on-Market-Definition.html





products can be substituted both on the demand and on the supply side. "the smallest group of

products (in a geographical area) that a hypothetical monopolist controlling that product

group (in that area) could profitably sustain a price above the ‘competitive’ price i.e. a price

that is at least a small but significant amount above the competitive price."

This test is commonly used in other jurisdictions with competition law31. However,

since the events occurred before the enforcement of CA 2010, therefore, the air services

framework omit to make clear and confirm on the definition of relevant market in order to

confirm the competition practice among air service operator.

MALAYSIAN COMPETITION ACT 2010

Malaysian Competition Act 2010 (CA2010) is a general competition law applicable to all

commercial activities both within and outside Malaysia32. Section 3(2) states that the

application of CA 2010 to any commercial activities outside Malaysian market is apply only

when it has an effect on competition in any market in Malaysia. It has specifically clarified

the description of commercial activities.

Commercial activities for the purpose of CA 2010 exclude any activity directly or

indirectly in the exercise of governmental authority; any activity conducted based on the

principle of solidarity; and any purchase of goods or services not for the purposes of offering

goods and services as part of an economic activity33.

31 ibid, para 1.632 ibid, Section 3(1)33 ibid, Section 3(4)(a),(b),(c)

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

13


The air services sector being international or domestic services are subjected to CA

2010. It is in line with the scope of application of force of CA 2010 mention above. Other

than the provision in Section 3, CA 2010 also allows exemption made individually for an

individual exemption or in block.

Individual exemption as provided in Section 6 refer to an application made by an

enterprise to Malaysian Competition Commission (MyCC) for an exemption with respect to a

particular agreement. In applying for an exemption under CA 2010, an enterprise must prove

that exemption is essential based on four grounds. An enterprise must proved that -

(a) there are significant identifiable technological, efficiency or social benefits

directly arising from the agreement;

(b) the benefits could not reasonably have been provided by the parties to

the agreement without the agreement having the effect of preventing,

restricting or distorting competition;

(c) the detrimental effect of the agreement on competition is proportionate

to the benefits provided; and

(d) the agreement does not allow the enterprise concerned to eliminate

competition completely in respect of a substantial part of the goods or

services34 .

MyCC may granted block exemption when it is in its opinion that a particular

category of agreement should be given relief from its liability35. The grounds for exemption

are similar as stated in Section 5 in applying for individual exemption.

34 ibid, Section 535 ibid, Section 8(1)

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

14


To date, there is no exemption applied by or granted to air services sector. MyCC on

its own accord however has started to investigate the share swap and corroboration agreement

between Air Asia and MAS36. The step was taken based on brouhaha surrounding the Air

Asia and MAS deal37. So far, Schedule 2 of CA 2010 only exempts two sectors mention

earlier. Both sectors are legislatively exempted because they have their own competition

provision in their sectoral legal framework.

CA 2010 divides prohibited conduct into two categories comprising of anti

competitive conduct and abused of dominant position. These competition prohibitions differ

from other competition law in most jurisdictions around the world. In general, competition

law in other countries acknowledge anti competitive agreement, abused of a dominant

position and merger and acquisition as three main conducts prohibited under the law. CA

2010 does not provide for merger and acquisition provision. This might be because the

provision for merger and acquisition has been provided under company law.

Section 4(1) states that anti competitive conduct includes any horizontal or vertical

agreement. The provision prohibits any horizontal or vertical agreement between enterprise

where the agreement has the object or effect of significantly preventing, restricting or

distorting competition in any market for goods or services. CA 2010 specify that horizontal

agreement between enterprises is deemed to have the object of significantly preventing,

restricting or distorting competition in any market for goods or services when the agreement

is proved to has the object to—

36 B.K Sidhu, 2012, MyCC to investigate if Air Asia-MAS share swap has made air fares go up, The Star Online, January 4, http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/1/4/business/10199177&sec=business (16 February 2012)37 ibid

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

15

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/1/4/business/10199177&sec=business



(a) fix, directly or indirectly, a purchase or selling price or any other trading

conditions;

(b) share market or sources of supply;

(c) limit or control production, market outlets or market access, technical or

technological development or investment; or

(d) perform an act of bid rigging,

Further, Section 10(1) prohibits any enterprise from engaging, whether independently

or collectively, in any conduct which amounts to an abuse of a dominant position in any

market for goods or services. The act of an abuse of a dominant position may include—

(a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling price or other

unfair trading condition on any supplier or customer;

(b) limiting or controlling production, market outlets or market access,

technical or technological development or investment to the prejudice of

consumers;

(c) refusing to supply to a particular enterprise or group or category of

enterprises;

(d) applying different conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading

parties to an extent that may discourage new market entry or expansion or

investment by an existing competitor, force from the market or otherwise

seriously damage an existing competitor which is no less efficient than the

enterprise in a dominant position; or harm competition in any market in which

the dominant enterprise is participating or in any upstream or downstream

market;

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

16


(e) making the conclusion of contract subject to acceptance by other parties

of supplementary conditions which by their nature or according to

commercial usage have no connection with the subject matter of the

contract;

(f) any predatory behaviour towards competitors; or

(g) buying up a scarce supply of intermediate goods or resources required by

a competitor, in circumstances where the enterprise in a dominant

position does not have a reasonable commercial justification for buying

up the intermediate goods or resources to meet its own needs38.

CA 2010 also acknowledge the act amounting to abused of dominant position to

exclude any steps taking by an enterprise in a dominant position which has reasonable

commercial justification or represents a reasonable commercial response to the market entry

or market conduct of a competitor39.

CONCLUSION

Based on the analysis above, the framework of the air services sector in Malaysia in which

based on the policies, regulations and international regime clearly does not have a clear and

orderly competition framework. The competition conduct is unclear, inadequate and not

harmonized with the provisions of the CA 2010 that is now in force in this sector. It is not

suitable to promote efficient competition. To date, no explanation nor transition period is

offered to the air services sector’s framework in order to rationalize the provisions of

competition law in CA 2010.

38 ibid Section 10 (2)39 ibid, Section 10(3)

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

17


The omission in confirming a clear stand in competition indicates that Malaysia is not

fully ready to release its state protectionist status to a more liberal market. The state

sovereignty issue is sensitive. Proper consideration should be measured to ensure balance

between national sovereignty and the need of competition in air services framework.

A clear framework on competition in air services sector need to be establish before

CA 2010 can be enforce to air services sector. Therefore, given a circumstances, thought it

does not fall under one of the grounds in applying individual exemption under Section 6 or

block exemption under Section 8, the air services sector in Malaysia is not ready to commit

with CA 2010. It warrant an exception to the enforcement of CA 2010.

REFERENCE:-

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

18


Abdullah Haji Ahmad Badawi. (2006). Prime Minister Press Statement. Kenyataan Media Mengenai Rasionalsasi Sektor Perkhidmatan Penerbangan Domestik, Pejabat Perdana Menteri.Putrajaya, 27 March, http://www.abdullah.cdc.net.my/malaysia/speeches/2006/2006-03-27.php (13 February 2012)

Alan Ting. (2007). MASWINGS Ambil Alih Perkhidmatan Udara Luar Bandar Secara Berperingkat. Bernama. 8 Jun. http://www.kpdnkk.bernama.com/newsBm.php?id=266471& (16 Februari 2012)

Azran Osman Rani. (2010). AirAsia X backs a clear national aviation policy. The Star Online. 6 May. http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/5/6/business/6197548&sec=business (16 February 2012)

Company Profile. http://firefly.com.my/about/company-profile (14 Februari 2012)

B.K Sidhu. (2012). MyCC to investigate if Air Asia-MAS share swap has made air fares go up. The Star Online. January 4. http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/1/4/business/10199177&sec=business (16 February 2012)

Portal Rasmi Unit Perangcangan Ekonomi, Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Dokumen,Rancangan Malaysia Ke10. http://www.epu.gov.my/html/themes/epu/html/RMKE10/rmke10_english.html (16 February 2012)

Cassey Lee. (2004). Competition Policy In Malaysia, Centre on Paper Series, Paper No. 68,. Institute for Development Policy and Management. University of Manchester. http://www.competition-regulation.org.uk/publications/working_papers/WP68.pdf (16 February 2012)

Competition Act 2010 (MALAYSIA)

International Convention On Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention) 1944

Khairuddin Md Amin .2006. MAS yakin catat untung – Di bawah penyusunan semula sektor penerbangan domestik, Utusan Malaysia Online. 29 Mac, http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2006&dt=0329&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Muka_Hadapan&pg=mh_01.htm (16 February 2012)

Malaysian Competition Commission, Guideline of Market Definition, http://www.mycc.gov.my/272_216_216/Web/WebPage/Guidelines-on-Market-Definition/Guidelines-on-Market-Definition.html (17 February 2012)

Malaysia Integrated Aeronautical Information Package. AIP Malaysia.

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

19





http://www.competition-regulation.org.uk/publications/working_papers/WP68.pdf

http://www.epu.gov.my/html/themes/epu/html/RMKE10/rmke10_english.html



http://firefly.com.my/about/company-profile







Khairuddin Md Amin. (2006). MAS yakin catat untung – Di bawah penyusunan semula sektor penerbangan domestik, Utusan Malaysia Online. 29 Mac. http://www.utusan.com.my/utusan/info.asp?y=2006&dt=0329&pub=Utusan_Malaysia&sec=Muka_Hadapan&pg=mh_01.htm (16 February 2012)

Shahrizan Salian. (2011). MAS ambil alih operasi jet Firefly. Berita Harian Online. 19 Oktober, http://www.bharian.com.my/articles/MASambilalihoperasijetFirefly/Article/print_html (14 February 2012)

Sherman Anti-Trust Act. (1890). Brief Info…., http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=51

Tengku Datuk Azmil Zahruddin. (2011). MAS and AirAsia X should co-pilot efforts to achieve nation’s aspiration. The Star Online. Saturday May 1. http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/5/1/business/6168011 (16 February 2012)

Wong Sai Wan. (2011). Share swap deal: AirAsia's Fernandes to gain 20% stake in MAS. The Star Online. Sunday August 7. http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/8/7/nation/9255271&sec=nation (16 February)

June 27-28, 2012

Cambridge, UK

20

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2011/8/7/nation/9255271&sec=nation

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2010/5/1/business/6168011







an overview on the application of malaysian competition ... hamzah, safinaz... · web viewmalaysian...

Documents