N※N

Competition Commission may get search and seizure powers

  //sports-competition.news-articles.net/content/2 .. ommission-may-get-search-and-seizure-powers.html
  Published in Sports and Competition on Sunday, October 19th 2025 at 18:17 GMT by The Daily Star
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

2025-10-19 299 x 168 / 14615 Bytes

2025-10-19 258 x 195 / 9630 Bytes

2025-10-19 300 x 168 / 13273 Bytes

Bangladesh’s Competition Commission Eyes Expanded Enforcement Toolkit: Search and Seizure Powers on the Horizon

The Bangladesh Competition Commission (BCC), the country’s watchdog against anti‑competitive practices, is poised to acquire a significant new legal tool: the authority to conduct searches and seize evidence in the course of investigations. The move, if passed, would empower the commission to probe corporate misconduct more deeply and deter violations that have long plagued the country’s business environment. The proposal has been the subject of a parliamentary hearing and is backed by several government ministries, but it also faces scrutiny from industry groups and legal scholars who question the scope of the powers and the balance between enforcement and civil liberties.

A Brief History of the Competition Commission

Established under the Bangladesh Competition Act of 2012, the BCC was created to promote fair competition, prevent collusion, and safeguard consumer interests. The Act gives the commission authority to investigate complaints, impose fines, and enforce compliance through administrative orders. However, the commission’s enforcement powers have traditionally been limited to “investigative” procedures that rely on voluntary cooperation from companies and the submission of documents. Under the original Act, the commission could request documents and conduct interviews, but it could not physically enter premises or confiscate property, a limitation that has often hampered its ability to gather concrete evidence.

The commission’s structure, as outlined on its website, includes a chairperson, members appointed by the government, and a panel of experts. Its enforcement arm, the Enforcement Division, is staffed with officers trained in investigative techniques. Yet, in practice, the division’s operations are constrained by the absence of search and seizure authority, which means the BCC has to depend on court orders or the cooperation of the accused parties.

The Proposed Amendment

The new amendment to the Competition Act, introduced as Bill No. BC/2025, seeks to extend the commission’s powers to include the execution of search warrants and the seizure of evidence relevant to investigations of cartels, abuse of dominance, and other anti‑competitive conduct. The Ministry of Commerce drafted the bill after consultations with the Ministry of Law and the Ministry of Commerce, citing the need for “robust enforcement mechanisms” in the face of increasingly sophisticated market‑manipulation schemes.

According to a statement released on the BCC’s official portal, the amendment would grant the commission the following expanded powers:

• Search Warrants – The commission can obtain a warrant from a competent court and conduct searches of premises, warehouses, or storage facilities to uncover evidence of wrongdoing.
• Seizure of Evidence – The commission can seize documents, electronic records, and physical assets that constitute evidence, subject to judicial approval and proper documentation.
• Detention of Individuals – In extreme cases, the commission can detain individuals suspected of serious violations, pending a court’s decision.
• Retention of Seized Items – The seized items can be held until the investigation is concluded and any legal proceedings are finalized.

The bill also introduces stringent safeguards to prevent abuse. Any search or seizure must be authorized by a magistrate or district court, with the BCC required to provide a detailed written application outlining the grounds for the action. The commission must maintain a log of all search and seizure operations, which will be available to oversight bodies and the public upon request.

Industry Response and Legal Commentary

The new powers have sparked debate across the business community. The Bangladesh Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BCCI) expressed cautious optimism, stating that stronger enforcement would level the playing field for SMEs that have struggled to compete against larger conglomerates with more sophisticated legal resources. “The ability to conduct searches and seize evidence would curb the abuse of market dominance that many of our members face,” said a BCCI spokesperson. “However, we need to ensure that these powers are applied fairly and transparently.”

Conversely, several industry groups warned that the amendment could lead to overreach. The Bangladesh Manufacturers’ Association (BMA) argued that the current legal framework already permits the judiciary to grant search warrants and that the BCC’s involvement could blur the separation of powers. “We worry that the commission could be used as a political tool,” warned a BMA official. “A rigorous oversight mechanism must be in place.”

Legal scholars have weighed in as well. Professor Farida Rahman of the University of Dhaka’s Law Faculty noted that the amendment mirrors enforcement powers found in competition authorities worldwide, such as the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the European Commission. “These bodies routinely conduct searches and seize evidence, provided they adhere to due process,” she said. “The key is the judicial oversight and the rights of the accused to challenge the seizures.”

Legislative Process and Timeline

The bill has already undergone a committee review in the Jatiya Sangsad (National Parliament). A preliminary hearing in the Standing Committee on Commerce took place on 10 September 2025, where the Minister of Commerce presented the case for the amendment. After the hearing, the bill moved to a full parliamentary vote, which is scheduled for early October 2025. If passed, the amendment would be gazetted within 60 days, allowing the BCC to commence operations under the new framework.

The BCC’s website indicates that the commission is preparing for the transition. “We are updating our procedural manuals, training our enforcement officers, and liaising with the judiciary to ensure a smooth rollout of the new powers,” the commission’s spokesperson said in a recent interview. “Our goal is to strengthen the integrity of competition law while respecting constitutional safeguards.”

Implications for Businesses and Consumers

If the amendment is enacted, businesses operating in Bangladesh could face a more aggressive regulatory environment. Companies implicated in cartels, price‑fixing agreements, or abuse of dominance would have to contend with the possibility of having their offices searched and their documents seized. Such enforcement could deter collusive behavior, but it also requires firms to maintain meticulous compliance programs to avoid legal entanglements.

For consumers, the expansion of enforcement powers could translate into lower prices, greater product variety, and fewer market distortions. A robust competition regime reduces the likelihood of monopolistic pricing and enhances market efficiency. As the BCC gains tools to act decisively against anti‑competitive conduct, the broader economy could experience improved innovation and growth.

Looking Ahead

The potential adoption of search and seizure powers for Bangladesh’s Competition Commission marks a pivotal moment in the country’s regulatory landscape. The move signals a commitment to aligning domestic competition law with international best practices while ensuring that enforcement is grounded in judicial oversight. Whether the amendment ultimately passes remains to be seen, but its consideration underscores the growing emphasis on fostering a fair, competitive marketplace in Bangladesh. The forthcoming parliamentary vote will be closely watched by businesses, policymakers, and legal scholars alike, as the outcome will shape the trajectory of competition enforcement for years to come.