双语新闻：中国处罚6家液晶面板企业
China has joined US and European regulators in a crackdown onsome of the world’s biggest liquid crystal display panel makers, signalling that Beijing is now a force in fighting global cartels.中国加入美欧监管机构的行列，对全球一些最大的液晶面板制造商进行处罚。此举显示，北京方面如今是对抗全球卡特尔的一支力量。
The National Development and Reform Commission, China’s economic planning agency thatregulates price-related monopoly issues, fined six South Korean and Taiwanese companies, including Samsung SDI, LG and Chimei Optoelectronics, Rmb353m ($57m) for fixing pricesbetween 2001 and 2006.
监管价格垄断行为的中国经济规划部门——国家发改委对6家韩国和台湾企业开出3.53亿元人民币（合5700万美元）的罚单，其中包括三星(Samsung)、LG和奇美电子(Chi Mei Optoelectronics)，理由是这些企业在2001年至2006年期间操纵价格。
The penalties are tiny compared with the $3.8bn US and European regulators have fined suppliersof flatscreen television components and the prison sentences that US courts have given industryexecutives since investigations began in 2006. But legal experts say the case has significancebecause it marks the first time Beijing has acted against an international cartel.
这些处罚相比之下还是轻微的。自2006年启动调查以来，美欧监管机构已对平板电视部件供应商处以38亿美元罚款，美国法庭还判处该行业内的某些高管入狱服刑。但是，法律专家们表示，本案具有重大意义，因为它标志着北京方面首次对一个国际卡特尔采取行动
“This is opening the floodgates in bringing global cartel cases to Chinese regulators along withthose in the US and elsewhere,” said Sébastien Evrard, a partner at law firm Jones Day in Beijing.
“这将打开闸门，使中国监管部门像美国和其他地方的同行一样，对全球卡特尔采取行动，”众达国际法律事务所(Jones Day)在北京的合伙人塞巴斯蒂安 埃弗拉尔(Sébastien Evrard)表示。
An investigation into a move by Unilever to raise detergent prices last year, which triggered panicbuying by consumers, had been Beijing’s only probe of a multinational company on price-relatedgrounds – and that did not include price-fixing accusations.
此前中国官方在价格问题上对跨国公司展开的唯一一起调查，是针对2011年联合利华(Unilever)上调洗衣粉价格的言论引发消费者恐慌抢购，那项调查不涉及操纵价格的指控。
According to the NDRC, the crackdown began at the request of Chinese customers of the displaymakers, who complained that the manufacturers had admitted price fixing in investigations abroad.
据发改委表示，处罚行动是应这些显示器制造商的中国客户的请求而启动的。这些客户抱怨称，这几家显示器制造商已在海外的调查中承认操纵价格。
Beijing ruled on the basis of the domestic pricing law because the price-fixing behaviour inquestion happened before the anti-monopoly law took effect.
北京方面依据国内的《价格法》作出此项裁决，因为相关的价格操纵行为是在《反垄断法》生效之前发生的。
页:
[1]