《反垄断法》修订后，如何精准规制自然人法律责任︱法经兵言

Core Viewpoint - The enforcement of antitrust laws in China has expanded to hold individuals accountable for organizing monopolistic agreements, marking a significant shift in regulatory practices and emphasizing the importance of compliance in sensitive industries like pharmaceuticals and energy [1][4][15] Summary by Sections Case Overview and Harm of Monopolistic Agreements - Four pharmaceutical companies were penalized for reaching a monopolistic agreement to fix prices of dexamethasone phosphate sodium raw materials, violating Article 17 of the Antitrust Law [2] - The individual responsible, identified as Guo, was fined 5 million yuan for facilitating this agreement, which is significant as it is the first case post-2022 Antitrust Law revision to hold an individual accountable [2][3] Market Impact and Social Consequences - The monopolistic behavior led to a significant distortion of market competition, affecting the pricing of downstream pharmaceutical products and increasing the financial burden on patients and the national healthcare system [3][4] - The raw material in question is crucial for producing medications used in treating severe COVID-19 cases, highlighting the public health implications of such monopolistic practices [2][3] Enforcement Highlights - This case represents a landmark in antitrust enforcement, as it extends liability to individuals who organize monopolistic agreements, thereby enhancing the legal accountability of market participants [4][6] - The enforcement action against Guo illustrates a shift towards a more comprehensive regulatory approach that targets not just corporate entities but also the individuals orchestrating anti-competitive behavior [4][8] Legal Framework and Implications - The 2022 revision of the Antitrust Law introduced provisions that explicitly prohibit individuals from organizing or assisting in the formation of monopolistic agreements, addressing previous regulatory gaps [9][10] - The case against Guo serves as a critical example of the legal system's ability to adapt and respond to complex market dynamics, particularly in the context of digital economies where traditional enforcement may be challenged [11][12] Economic Perspective - The role of organizers in monopolistic agreements is crucial, as they can significantly lower the costs of collusion and enhance the stability of such agreements, thereby posing a serious threat to market competition [10][11] - By targeting the organizers, the regulatory framework aims to prevent the formation of monopolistic structures before they can cause substantial market harm [11][15]