A NEW ANTIMONOPOLY VIOLATION IS EXPOSED IN THE COURSE OF A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION

Penza OFAS issued a decision upon a fact of collusion between “Regional Oncology Early Treatment Centre” State Budgetary Healthcare Facility and “Pharmaceutical Import, Export” JSC

Penza OFAS verified information about possible violation of the antimonopoly law from the Investigation Department of the Investigation Committee of the Russian Federation in the Pena region, which became known as a result of investigating a criminal case against a former Chief Medical Officer of the “Regional Oncology Early Treatment Centre”.

Zheleznodorozhny District Court in Penza sentenced him to five-year imprisonment and 11 million RUB fine for bribery.

According to the case materials, the former Chief Medical Officer of the “Regional Oncology Early Treatment Centre” entered into an anticompetitive agreement with “Pharmimexp” JSC and was taking bribes for making the company win auctions for supplying pharmaceuticals. As a result of the anticompetitive agreement with the Chief Medical Officer of the Oncology Early Treatment Centre, “Pharmimexp” JSC was able to overrate the initial contract prices and then win auction without decreasing the price in the absence of competitors.

Such anticompetitive agreements incur criminal liability for top-executives of commercial companies as well as representatives of the authorities; the antimonopoly law also specifies turnover fines for legal entities that enter and implement such agreements. Efficient interaction between the antimonopoly and law enforcement bodies facilitates ascertaining the violators’ guilt in all aspects of their illegal activities.

Head of FAS Anti-Cartel Department Andrey Tenishev commented the decision: “Anticompetitive agreements between customers and bidders, especially in medicine are frequent in our practice. Such collusions always make consumers suffer as less medicinal drugs than due because of originally overrated contract prices. Procurement bidders first overrate the costs of medication and then won auctions without price reduction. He3bce the “kickback” money for the ordering parties”.