July 24, 2012—Commenting on the leniency program of India’s competition regulator, CCI, Nathan India director, Dr. Ram Tamara, pointed out that the direct evidence such programs unearth helps regulators more than circumstantial evidence. CCI announced Tuesday that persons and companies who come forward with information on cartels will be shown leniency, as required under the country’s Competition Act.
The announcement comes on the heels of CCI’s fining a cement cartel an amount equivalent to 50 percent of profits for a two-year period.
As described in the July 24 article in Business Standard, CCI’s case against the cartel did not make use of the leniency program, but, according to Dr. Tamara
In the advanced jurisdictions, cartels are prosecuted based on evidence obtained through leniency provisions... evidence of meetings, phone calls, and other mechanisms. ...Exchanging information is more substantial than relying on economic and circumstantial evidence. A whistle blower can provide documented evidence.
He then described how five paraffin producers applied to the European Commission for leniency and provided details on cartel meetings and other communications, building regulators' evidence that a paraffin wax cartel operated in Europe for more than 10 years.