【新唐人2014年09月08日訊】最近，中共頻頻使用《反壟斷法》，對眾多知名外資企業進行調查。在只能默默承受中共當局的突襲辦公室、漫長的調查，以及高額罰款之後，有跡象顯示在華外企打算聯手反抗。繼上個月「中國歐盟商會」發表聲明，日前，「美中貿易全國委員會」也發佈報告，質疑中共反壟斷程序的正當性。
9月3號，代表200多家在華美商的「美中貿易全國委員會」(US-China Business Council) 發表報告指出，中共當局最近頻繁以「反壟斷」為由，不按正當程序，對在華外企施加壓力。
報告說，中共反壟斷執法機構逼迫被調查企業承認違法行為，但不出示相關證據，也不給這些企業就相關指控作出解釋的機會，甚至不說明調查理由。
報告還說，一些企業透露，在執法人員對其辦公室進行突訪前，它們沒有得到聯繫法律顧問的機會，而在後續可能開展的冗長談判中，它們的律師也被排除在外。
原北京大學法律系講師王天成：「這個委員會提出的這些要求，從法律的角度上來說，當然是正當的，中國政府要反壟斷，它應該遵循正當的法律的程序，應該要有必要的證據，應該要有善意的程序聽取解釋，這是法治所要求的。」
據了解，到目前為止，至少30家外資企業受到中共的所謂「反壟斷調查」。7月28號，美國電腦軟件巨頭「微軟」在北京、上海等地的4個辦事處，遭到中共國家工商總局突擊調查。在此之前，中共發改委曾對世上最大手機芯片製造商「高通」發起反壟斷調查，「高通」被指控濫用市場支配地位非法牟利。
8月4號，跨國汽車公司「奔馳」(Mercedes-Benz)位於上海的辦事處，也遭到反壟斷調查。而「克萊斯勒」(Chrysler)和「奧迪」(Audi)兩家企業，已被查明存在壟斷行為，其中一汽-大眾奧迪的罰金初步定為18億元人民幣，如果18億罰單成真，將創下中共反壟斷罰金最高記錄。
8月20號，中共發改委宣佈，對12家日本汽車配件生產商，罰款12.4億元人民幣。
美中貿易全國委員會主席傅強恩(John Frisbie)指出，中共執法機構的正當程序、透明度，以及賠償和罰款的裁定方法，都需要改善。
上個月，代表1800家歐洲在華企業的「中國歐盟商會」(European Union Chamber of Commerce in China)針對中共當局的反壟斷調查發表聲明說：「在未進行充分聽證的前提下，有關部門通過帶有恐嚇性的行政手段迫使企業接受懲罰和治理，這類現象值得高度警惕。」
聲明指出：「諸如告知企業不要對調查者提出質疑和挑戰、不要在審訊環節僱傭律師或求助其政府、所屬商會等行為，都與最佳訟程程序背道而馳。」
旅美中國社會問題研究人士張健：「外資企業在華受到一些優待之後，中共各地方政府也露出了猙獰的面孔，『養肥了豬，就要殺了過年』用這種方式來對所有的外資企業進行整肅，而且以黑道的方式，不講理的方式，公然踐踏了法律，也踐踏了反壟斷法的公平、公開、公正的三公原則。」
據《路透社》8月21號報導，中共發改委官員徐新宇在近期一次會議上，向「通用電氣」和「西門子」等約30家外企施壓，要求他們坦白壟斷行為，並警告他們不要聘請外部律師來對抗監管機構的指控。一名與會消息人士透露，徐新宇對在場企業說：「如果你想對抗，我可以將罰金翻一倍或兩倍。」
《紐約時報》指出，外資企業通常缺少中國競爭對手所擁有的政治背景，一旦成為打擊目標，往往會保持沉默。
王天成：「如果你去抗議，你可能會受到懲罰，會受到報復，所以他們就會忍氣吞聲。不過還好，畢竟是外企，有自己的國家，在自己的國家還有一些組織，就像剛才說的委員會，給它們發出聲音。」
旅美中國社會問題研究人士張健指出，最應該被反壟斷調查的，是中國所有的國有企業，那些遭到中共調查的外企，很有可能會聯手，把中共這種不公平對待，以及違反法律程序的種種行徑，告到國際法庭。
採訪/易如 編輯/陳潔 後製/李勇
Foreign Companies Resist the CCP’s “Anti-Monopoly" Raids
Recently, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has used
Anti-Monopoly law to investigate a number of renowned
foreign companies.
After silent tolerance of the CCP’s surprise raids, lengthy
investigation and heavy fines, those foreign companies
finally made some resistance.
Following European Union Chamber of Commerce in China,
US-China Business Council also made a statement that
questions legitimacy of the CCP’s “Anti-Monopoly” moves.
On Sep. 3, US-China Business Council (USCBC), a group
on behalf of over 200 US companies in China, issued a report.
The report said the CCP had been pressing foreign
companies in the name of “Anti-Monopoly" without
due procedure.
According to the report, the CCP’s anti-monopoly organ
had forced companies to admit their illegal acts.
However, the officers did not show evidence or give
companies any chance to defend themselves.
The companies were not even told why they
were investigated.
The report also quoted sources that the companies were
not given any chance to contact legal counselors
before surprise raids.
In the following negotiation that could possibly be very
lengthy, their lawyers were also left out of the discussion.
Wang Tiancheng, former lecturer in law at Peking
University:"The Council’s demands are definitely legitimate.
The CCP should follow the right procedures to make
anti-monopoly investigations.
They should provide necessary evidence as well as
considerate hearing programs.
These things are demanded by the rule of law."
At least 30 foreign companies were reportedly subjected to
the CCP’s so-called “Anti-Monopoly" investigation.
On July 28, four Microsoft offices in Beijing or Shanghai
were abruptly raided by the State Administration
for Industry and Commerce.
Shortly before that, the CCP also investigated Qualcomm,
the biggest maker of smart phone chips,
on anti-monopoly charges.
The CCP claimed Qualcomm had made unlawful profits
by abusing its leading role in the market.
On Aug. 4, Mercedes-Benz’s agency in Shanghai was also
raided by anti-monopoly officers.
Chrysler and Audi were alleged by the CCP to violate
anti-monopoly law.
FAW’s Audi was preliminarily demanded a fine of
1.8 billion Yuan ($293M).
This would be the largest ever anti-monopoly fine
in China if it becomes true.
On Aug. 20, the CCP’s National Development and Reform
Commission (NDRC) also announced that 12 Japanese
makers of auto parts would be fined 1.24 billion Yuan ($200M).
John Frisbie, USCBC president, said the CCP needs to
improve its “due process, transparency and the
methodology for determining remedies and fines."
Last month, European Union Chamber of Commerce in China
also made a statement on the CCP’s Anti-Monopoly raids,
on behalf of 1800 European companies in China.
The statement said “numerous alarming anecdotal accounts
from a number of sectors that administrative intimidation
tactics are being used to impel companies to accept
punishments and remedies without full hearings."
The statement said “practices such as informing companies
not to challenge the investigations, bring lawyers to
hearings or involve their respective governments or
chambers of commerce are contrary to best practices."
Zhang Jian, scholar of China social affairs:"After giving
preferential treatment, the CCP’s local governments finally
revealed their ferocious faces.
They are crushing foreign companies like pigs that are well
fed for New Year’s feast.
When doing that, they acted like mafias, ignoring law
and the principles of anti-monopoly law which are fairness,
openness and justice."
Reuters reported on Aug. 21 that Xu Xinyu, an NDRC officer,
intimidated about 30 foreign companies like General
Electric and Siemens to admit their monopoly acts
in a recent meeting.
He also warned them not to resist by hiring lawyers.
A source at the meeting said, Xu told those companies
“I will double fine if anyone attempts to resist."
New York Times commented that, unlike their Chinese
competitors, most foreign companies do not have any
political background in China.
Therefore they usually stay silent even under
harsh crackdown.
Wang Tiancheng:"You may be punished or even retaliated
against if making any protests.
That’s why those companies submit to humiliation.
But after all foreign companies have native countries.
Organizations from their own countries can speak publicly
for them."
Zhang Jian said it is all the CCP’s state-owned companies
that should be subject to anti-monopoly investigation.
After being raided by the CCP, those foreign companies
may unite to appeal to international courts against
the CCP’s unfair treatment and violation of due procedure.
Interview/YiRu Edit/ChenJie Post-Production/LiYong
