Competition Awareness Campaigns

1. Introduction

Competition awareness campaigns are an important part of competition advocacy. They seek to educate businesses, consumers, trade associations, government officials, regulators, professionals and other stakeholders about:

the benefits of competitive markets;

prohibited anti-competitive agreements;

abuse of dominant position;

bid-rigging and cartel conduct;

merger and acquisition obligations;

consumer choice and fair pricing;

compliance programmes;

complaint and enforcement mechanisms; and

the economic consequences of restricting competition.

Competition awareness is particularly important in developing competition-law systems because the existence of legislation alone does not automatically create a culture of competition. The International Competition Network describes advocacy as a means of educating citizens, businesses and policymakers and promoting a competition culture. (International Competition Network)

The OECD similarly treats communication and public awareness as important tools for increasing compliance and creating a level playing field. (OECD ONE MP)

In Bangladesh, this function is particularly significant for the Bangladesh Competition Commission (BCC/CCB) because the Competition Act, 2012 is comparatively new and effective enforcement depends substantially on awareness among businesses and public institutions.

2. Meaning of Competition Awareness Campaigns

A competition awareness campaign is a planned communication and educational programme designed to increase understanding of competition law and competitive-market principles.

It may be directed toward:

A. Businesses

Businesses may be educated about:

cartel prohibitions;

price fixing;

market sharing;

bid rigging;

resale-price restrictions;

exclusive dealing;

abuse of dominance;

discriminatory conduct;

merger notification requirements; and

compliance programmes.

B. Consumers

Consumers can be taught how competition benefits them through:

lower prices;

greater product choice;

better quality;

innovation;

improved service;

technological development; and

easier switching between suppliers.

C. Government agencies

Government officials need awareness regarding:

competition-neutral regulation;

licensing restrictions;

unnecessary entry barriers;

state-owned enterprises;

public procurement;

sector regulation;

subsidies;

exclusive concessions; and

government-created monopolies.

D. Trade associations

Trade associations are particularly important because legitimate industry cooperation can sometimes cross the line into:

price coordination;

market allocation;

collective boycotts;

exchange of competitively sensitive information; or

output restrictions.

E. Academia and legal professionals

Universities, lawyers, economists and professional associations can contribute to developing competition-law expertise and a long-term competition culture.

3. Objectives of Competition Awareness Campaigns

3.1 Creating a competition culture

The fundamental objective is to make competition an accepted principle of economic policy.

The ICN considers competition advocacy a mechanism for developing a competition culture, rather than merely enforcing the law after violations occur. (International Competition Network)

A competition culture means that businesses, regulators and consumers understand that competition is economically valuable and that anti-competitive conduct is unacceptable.

3.2 Preventing violations

Awareness can prevent violations before they occur.

For example, a business that understands that competitors cannot agree upon prices may avoid participating in an industry meeting where competitors discuss future prices.

Thus:

Awareness operates ex ante, whereas enforcement generally operates ex post.

This makes awareness campaigns a relatively inexpensive complement to investigations and penalties.

3.3 Improving compliance

Competition authorities can use campaigns to encourage businesses to establish:

compliance officers;

competition-law manuals;

employee training;

reporting mechanisms;

internal audits;

competition-law clauses in contracts; and

procedures for dealing with competitors.

The OECD identifies campaigns, events, training and compliance-oriented communications as important tools used by competition authorities internationally. (OECD)

4. Competition Awareness and Cartel Prevention

Cartels are particularly suitable for awareness campaigns.

A campaign may explain that competitors must not:

agree on prices;

divide customers;

allocate geographical territories;

manipulate tenders;

restrict production;

exchange strategically sensitive information; or

coordinate future commercial behaviour.

Awareness campaigns can also publicise:

leniency programmes;

whistle-blower mechanisms;

penalties;

investigation powers; and

consequences of cartel participation.

The OECD has observed that cartel advocacy can enhance detection and deterrence, but that advocacy works best when supported by credible enforcement. (OECD ONE MP)

5. Competition Awareness in Bangladesh

The Bangladesh Competition Commission has an important advocacy and awareness role under the Competition Act framework.

Its advocacy functions include activities designed to:

promote understanding of competition law;

encourage competitive markets;

conduct seminars and workshops;

communicate with businesses and stakeholders;

promote freedom of trade and business; and

address barriers that restrict competition.

A particularly important example was the March 2024 UNCTAD/Commonwealth-supported workshop concerning the peer review of Bangladesh's Competition Act, 2012, followed by a capacity-building workshop. (Central Bank of Bangladesh)

Such programmes demonstrate that awareness is not limited to consumer advertising. It also involves institutional capacity building, professional education and dissemination of competition-law principles.

6. Major Forms of Competition Awareness Campaigns

6.1 Seminars and conferences

Competition authorities can conduct seminars involving:

businesses;

chambers of commerce;

trade associations;

lawyers;

economists;

government officials;

academics; and

consumer organisations.

Topics can include cartel compliance, dominance, mergers and digital markets.

6.2 Industry-specific campaigns

General awareness is often insufficient.

A competition authority can conduct separate programmes for:

pharmaceuticals;

cement;

banking;

insurance;

telecommunications;

energy;

transport;

digital platforms;

agriculture;

public procurement; and

construction.

Industry-specific campaigns allow authorities to explain the particular competition risks faced by each sector.

6.3 Digital awareness

Modern competition advocacy increasingly uses:

social media;

short videos;

podcasts;

webinars;

infographics;

online compliance guides;

FAQs;

newsletters; and

interactive educational material.

The OECD has documented the increasing use of digital communication by competition authorities. (OECD)

6.4 Public procurement campaigns

Public procurement is particularly vulnerable to bid rigging.

Campaigns should teach procurement officials how to identify:

identical bids;

suspicious bid rotation;

unusual subcontracting arrangements;

geographic allocation;

repeated winning patterns;

identical mistakes in tender documents; and

unexplained withdrawal of bids.

This connects awareness with cartel detection.

7. Six Important Case Laws

The following cases do not all concern an "awareness campaign" as the direct subject of litigation. Rather, they illustrate why competition authorities need effective awareness, compliance and advocacy programmes and the legal principles that such programmes should communicate.

Case 1: United States v. Socony-Vacuum Oil Co.

310 U.S. 150 (1940)

Facts

Several oil companies were involved in arrangements concerning the purchase and pricing of surplus gasoline.

Legal principle

The United States Supreme Court treated price-fixing among competitors as a serious per se violation of antitrust law.

Relevance to awareness campaigns

This case demonstrates why competition authorities must clearly communicate to businesses that agreements concerning prices can constitute unlawful cartel conduct.

An awareness campaign should therefore specifically explain:

Competitors must independently determine their prices.

The case is especially important for training trade associations and industry executives.

Case 2: United States v. Container Corporation of America

393 U.S. 333 (1969)

Facts

Competitors exchanged information concerning prices charged to customers.

Decision

The Supreme Court found that the exchange of competitively sensitive pricing information could facilitate unlawful coordination.

Importance

This case demonstrates that competition violations do not necessarily require an express written agreement fixing prices.

Awareness implication

Competition campaigns should educate businesses about the dangers of:

sharing future pricing intentions;

exchanging customer-specific information;

exchanging strategic production information; and

discussing commercially sensitive information with competitors.

This is particularly relevant to industry conferences and trade-association meetings.

Case 3: Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc.

551 U.S. 877 (2007)

Facts

Leegin maintained resale-price policies concerning retailers selling its products.

Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court held that minimum resale-price maintenance should generally be examined under the rule of reason, rather than automatically being treated as per se unlawful.

Importance for awareness campaigns

This case illustrates why competition education must be accurate and nuanced.

A campaign should not simply tell businesses that every vertical restriction is illegal. Instead, businesses should understand the distinction between:

horizontal agreements;

vertical agreements;

per se restrictions; and

conduct requiring effects-based analysis.

Therefore, awareness campaigns must be legally sophisticated rather than merely punitive.

Case 4: Competition Commission of India v. Steel Authority of India Ltd.

(2010) 10 SCC 744

Facts

The case concerned the Competition Commission of India's investigative and enforcement powers and the procedural framework under the Competition Act, 2002.

Decision

The Supreme Court examined the statutory scheme governing the Competition Commission and clarified important aspects of the Commission's role.

Relevance

The case demonstrates that competition authorities require a legally recognised institutional framework to investigate anti-competitive conduct.

Awareness significance

Awareness campaigns should explain:

the jurisdiction of the competition authority;

how complaints may be made;

the investigation process;

rights of parties;

orders that may be issued; and

available appellate remedies.

Public understanding of enforcement institutions increases the likelihood that violations will be reported.

Case 5: Excel Crop Care Ltd. v. Competition Commission of India

(2017) 8 SCC 47

Facts

The case concerned allegations of bid rigging in relation to public procurement.

Decision

The Supreme Court examined the application of competition law to bid-rigging and the calculation of penalties.

Importance

This is particularly relevant to competition awareness campaigns directed toward procurement officials and businesses.

A campaign based on the principles illustrated by Excel Crop Care can explain:

what constitutes bid rigging;

how tender coordination occurs;

why procurement competition matters;

how suspicious bidding patterns can be detected; and

the consequences of cartel behaviour.

Broader lesson

Competition advocacy and enforcement can reinforce each other. A successful bid-rigging case can itself become an educational tool.

Case 6: Competition Commission of India v. Bharti Airtel Ltd.

(2019) 2 SCC 521

Facts

The dispute involved the relationship between competition law and sector-specific telecommunications regulation.

Decision

The Supreme Court considered the role of the sector regulator and the Competition Commission in addressing issues involving regulated markets.

Importance for awareness campaigns

The case demonstrates the importance of educating businesses about the interaction between:

competition law;

sectoral regulation;

regulatory jurisdiction; and

market conduct.

Bangladesh relevance

Similar issues can arise in Bangladesh in sectors such as:

telecommunications;

banking;

energy;

transport;

financial services; and

digital platforms.

Awareness campaigns should therefore be coordinated between competition authorities and sector regulators.

8. Additional Comparative Case: Wouters v. Algemene Raad van de Nederlandsche Orde van Advocaten

Case C-309/99, Wouters, EU:C:2002:98

The European Court of Justice examined competition restrictions associated with professional regulation.

The case is important because it demonstrates that not every restriction imposed within a professional framework is automatically unlawful; the broader regulatory context and legitimate objectives may matter.

Awareness lesson

Professional associations should therefore be educated about:

legitimate professional regulation;

prohibited coordination;

competition-neutral rules; and

restrictions that may unnecessarily exclude competitors.

9. Competition Awareness and Consumer Welfare

Competition campaigns should not focus exclusively on businesses.

Consumers need to understand that competition can produce:

Lower prices

Competition pressures firms to reduce excessive prices.

Better quality

Businesses compete through service quality, reliability and product standards.

Innovation

Competitive pressure encourages technological development.

Choice

Consumers benefit from multiple suppliers.

Protection against exploitation

Awareness can help consumers recognise practices such as:

misleading price comparisons;

artificial scarcity;

restrictive subscriptions;

discriminatory access;

excessive switching costs; and

deceptive commercial practices.

The OECD has highlighted campaigns addressing digital practices such as drip pricing, pressure selling, subscription traps and fake reviews as examples of modern competition-related communication. (OECD)

10. Competition Awareness and Small and Medium Enterprises

SMEs are particularly important targets.

A large corporation may have an internal legal department, while a small business may not.

Campaigns should therefore provide SMEs with simple guidance on:

what constitutes a cartel;

what information can be exchanged;

dealing with dominant firms;

exclusive distribution;

franchising restrictions;

participation in trade associations;

public procurement; and

filing complaints.

Awareness can prevent SMEs from unknowingly participating in anti-competitive arrangements.

11. Competition Awareness and Trade Associations

Trade associations present a special risk.

A legitimate association can perform useful functions such as:

industry standards;

technical cooperation;

research;

professional development; and

representation before government.

But the same platform can facilitate:

price coordination;

output restrictions;

market allocation;

customer allocation; and

exchange of strategic information.

Therefore, competition awareness campaigns should encourage trade associations to establish:

competition-law codes;

meeting protocols;

agendas;

minutes;

legal review;

employee training; and

procedures for stopping inappropriate discussions.

12. Competition Awareness and Government Policy

Competition advocacy is not confined to private businesses.

Government policies themselves can restrict competition through:

unnecessary licences;

exclusive rights;

import restrictions;

discriminatory regulation;

entry barriers;

unnecessary permits;

state-created monopolies; and

procurement rules favouring incumbents.

The ICN expressly recognises advocacy as a tool for addressing public restrictions on competition. (International Competition Network)

Consequently, competition awareness campaigns should also target policymakers.

13. Role of Media in Competition Awareness

The media can significantly increase the effectiveness of competition campaigns.

Competition authorities should communicate enforcement decisions in accessible language.

For example:

Technical statement:

“The Commission determined that the undertaking infringed the prohibition against anti-competitive agreements.”

Public-oriented explanation:

“Competitors cannot agree among themselves to keep prices artificially high.”

The second formulation is more effective for public awareness.

The ICN's research has identified press releases and media engagement among important methods used by competition agencies to increase public awareness. (International Competition Network)

14. Measuring the Effectiveness of Awareness Campaigns

A competition authority should not measure success merely by the number of seminars held.

Better indicators include:

Knowledge indicators

percentage of businesses recognising cartel conduct;

number of trained procurement officials;

consumer awareness levels.

Behavioural indicators

reduction in problematic agreements;

improved compliance;

increased self-reporting.

Enforcement indicators

quality of complaints;

whistle-blower reports;

cartel detection;

voluntary compliance.

Policy indicators

removal of unnecessary entry barriers;

adoption of competition-neutral regulations;

increased cooperation between regulators.

15. Limitations of Competition Awareness Campaigns

Awareness campaigns cannot replace enforcement.

A business may know that price fixing is illegal and nevertheless engage in it because the expected economic benefit exceeds the perceived risk.

Consequently:

Awareness without enforcement may lack deterrent power.

The OECD expressly emphasises that advocacy and vigorous cartel enforcement should operate together. (OECD ONE MP)

The strongest model is therefore:

Awareness → Compliance → Detection → Enforcement → Public communication → Further deterrence

16. Recommendations for Bangladesh

For Bangladesh, competition awareness could be strengthened through a structured national programme.

1. National Competition Awareness Week

The BCC could organise an annual nationwide programme involving:

businesses;

consumers;

universities;

chambers;

government agencies; and

procurement officials.

2. Sector-specific programmes

Separate campaigns should address:

pharmaceuticals;

telecommunications;

banking;

energy;

food;

cement;

transport;

digital platforms; and

public procurement.

3. SME compliance programme

Simple compliance manuals should be developed for SMEs.

4. Cartel-awareness programme

The Commission should explain:

price fixing;

bid rigging;

market allocation;

customer allocation; and

information exchange.

5. Digital campaign

Short Bengali and English videos could explain competition-law concepts in accessible language.

6. University outreach

Law, economics, business and public-policy students should receive competition-law education.

7. Procurement training

Public procurement officials should receive practical bid-rigging detection training.

8. Trade-association compliance

Trade associations should be encouraged to adopt competition-law compliance codes.

9. Publication of enforcement decisions

Important CCB decisions should be summarised in plain language so that enforcement itself becomes an awareness mechanism.

10. Coordination with regulators

Competition awareness should be integrated with the work of sector regulators.

17. Overall Legal Significance

Competition awareness campaigns perform three interconnected functions:

Preventive function

They inform businesses before violations occur.

Participatory function

They empower consumers, competitors and public officials to identify and report anti-competitive conduct.

Deterrent function

They publicise the consequences of unlawful conduct.

The experience of competition authorities internationally shows that awareness campaigns are most effective when they are continuous, targeted and supported by credible enforcement. The OECD notes that events and communication can build trust and provide platforms for businesses, academics, consumers and government stakeholders to engage with competition authorities. (OECD)

18. Conclusion

Competition awareness campaigns are an essential component of modern competition law. They transform competition law from a purely enforcement-oriented statute into a broader system of economic governance.

For Bangladesh, the significance is particularly high because effective implementation of the Competition Act, 2012 requires businesses, consumers, government bodies and regulators to understand both what competition law prohibits and why competitive markets matter.

The six principal cases discussed—Socony-Vacuum, Container Corporation, Leegin, SAIL, Excel Crop Care and Bharti Airtel—demonstrate different dimensions of the principles that awareness programmes should communicate: cartel prohibition, information exchange, vertical restraints, institutional enforcement, bid rigging and coordination between competition and sectoral regulation.

Ultimately, the most effective competition policy combines:

Public awareness + business compliance + regulatory advocacy + credible investigation + effective sanctions.

Thus, competition awareness campaigns should not be viewed as merely educational or promotional activities. They are a preventive, participatory and deterrent instrument of competition policy, capable of strengthening compliance, improving market transparency and developing a durable culture of competition.