On November 13, the BRICS Working Group on Cartels held a meeting at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE University). The event took place as part of the 10th Anniversary International Conference “Antimonopoly Policy: Science, Practice, Education”, organized jointly by the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia (FAS Russia), HSE University, and the International BRICS Competition Law and Policy Centre.
In the context of globalization, restrictive practices by multinational corporations and the expansion of cross-border cartels are becoming increasingly prevalent, causing harm to both national and global economies. This is why competition authorities devote particular attention to combating cartels, viewing them as a threat to economic stability, public welfare, and national security, noted the meeting’s moderator, Andrey Tsyganov, PhD in Economics, Deputy Head of the Federal Antimonopoly Service of Russia. As BRICS countries deepen their integration into global value chains, the impact of predatory cartel behavior becomes especially significant. Yet the lack of well-developed universal mechanisms for cooperation among competition authorities poses challenges for effective cross-border cartel enforcement.
“The transnational nature of many cartels often undermines the efforts of individual competition agencies, as participants exploit differences in legal systems, sanctions, investigative tools, and the limited level of mutual trust between countries,”
Tsyganov stressed.
One of the promising tools for enhancing cooperation among BRICS antitrust authorities could be joint analysis of the practices of digital platforms operating in the global grain market, argued Alexey Ivanov, Director of the BRICS Competition Law and Policy Centre. According to him, the high degree of market concentration in this area may create conditions conducive to coordinated behavior, thereby warranting close regulatory attention.
In the photo, from left to right: Alexey Ivanov, Andrey Tsyganov, Artem Isaychik © HSE University
Specifically, he referred to the Covantis platform, established by major global grain ABCD traders (ADM, Bunge-Viterra, Cargill, Louis Dreyfus) alongside COFCO. This digital infrastructure centralizes data and processes across the supply chain, which may, in theory, enhance the influence of a limited group of firms over key segments of the market. Similar concerns had previously been raised regarding the Tract platform — a joint project of Louis Dreyfus, Olam, Cargill, and ADM — which was examined in 2023 by Brazil’s competition authority, CADE. The regulator classified Tract as a joint venture and required the platform to implement additional transparency and pro-competitive safeguards.
“It is important to note that, despite Covantis’ reliance on technologies described as ‘decentralized,’ actual control over the platform remains concentrated within a narrow group of major market players,”
Ivanov said.
He emphasized that the digitalization of global food supply chains has the potential to significantly reshape market dynamics by strengthening the position of leading companies. Under these conditions, competition agencies must coordinate their efforts, as individual national authorities may find it difficult to assess cross-border effects and global risks.
The importance of cooperation is also evident from the experience of South Africa. Despite the Competition Commission’s expertise in investigating cross-border collusion, most such cases in other African jurisdictions remain unaddressed due to limited regulatory capacity, noted Maanda Lambani, Head of Investigations Division, Competition Commission of South Africa. South Africa occupies a unique position as a “gateway to Africa,” as most global firms enter the continent through its market. As a result, cross-border cartels have a direct impact on the country, and inadequate enforcement may have spillover effects throughout the region.
“This is why we support the African Union’s adoption of the Competition Protocol, which will establish a unified mechanism enabling cross-border cartel investigations affecting multiple states to be conducted under a single jurisdiction, thereby preventing violations in other African countries,”
he said.
Artem Isaychik, Deputy Head of the Department for Combating Cartels and Control of Closed Procurement of the FAS Russia, outlined Russia’s recent enforcement efforts. Among the agency’s priorities are detecting and preventing cartels in public procurement and national projects—areas that involve substantial budgetary resources — as well as preventing unjustified price increases for socially important goods.
“In the first three quarters of 2025, FAS Russia’s central office initiated 39 antitrust cases involving horizontal agreements, concerted practices by economic entities, and agreements with government authorities or procurement bodies. The sectors with the most violations were construction and roadworks, pharmaceuticals, and social catering.”
Deswin Nur, Head of Public Relations and Cooperation Bureau of the Indonesia Competition Commission, highlighted that Indonesian competition law relies on the rule-of-reason approach when assessing cartel cases. This approach requires an evaluation of their economic impact, consumer welfare implications, and actual market effects. Unlike the per se doctrine, the rule-of-reason framework demands proof that the conduct in question negatively affects competition before it can be deemed unlawful. Noor noted that investigations into cross-border cartels are complicated by differences in national enforcement tools, including the existence or absence of leniency programs, and by divergent national interests, which may limit countries’ willingness to cooperate. He emphasized that effective collaboration is grounded in mutual trust built on shared objectives, institutional competence, and personal relationships among regulators.
In the photo, from left to right: Gian Marco Solas, Amir Ahmad Zolfaghari, Deswin Nur, Maanda Lambani © HSE University
China adheres to a policy of “zero tolerance” toward monopolistic practices, stated Zhai Yunpeng, Deputy General Director of Anti-Monopoly Enforcement Department of State Administration for Market Regulation of China. Regardless of where the violation occurs, if it restricts competition in the Chinese market, Chinese authorities are empowered—and obligated — to take decisive action under national competition law.
“Combating monopolistic practices is not only our domestic responsibility in maintaining market order but also part of our contribution to shaping a fair global competitive environment,”
he said.
For Iran, which has long been subject to extensive economic sanctions, the issue of cartels must be viewed through a broader lens, argued Amir Ahmad Zolfaghari, Deputy of the Economics Department, National Competition Council of Iran.
“This reality forces us to ask an unconventional question: can strategically designed cross-border agreements be used to counteract sanctions and mitigate their negative effects on competition? This is a complex issue that requires further discussion and innovative thinking.”
Noureldin Alfiqy, Legal researcher of Egyptian Competition Authority, noted that while international cooperation is essential for addressing cross-border cartels, national regulators remain constrained by their domestic laws. Game-theoretic analysis, he explained, shows that agencies often act unilaterally even when cooperative action would be more beneficial.
“There is a need to strengthen incentives for competition enforcement in foreign jurisdictions. This can be achieved by expanding international trade, as broader markets increase mutual interest in cooperation. It is also important to create effective mechanisms for inter-state coordination, a coherent international regulatory framework, and a dispute-resolution mechanism to ensure compliance.”
© HSE University
In his remarks, Salama Ghwil, Chairman of the Competition and Antitrust Council of Libya, underscored the need to develop and strengthen institutional cooperation between Libyan and Russian regulators. Priority areas include joint action against cross-border cartels, reducing barriers to data exchange, harmonizing legal norms, enhancing professional training, and expanding international knowledge-sharing. He also emphasized the importance of protecting the interests of developing countries, which often suffer from the negative impact of transnational cartels that undermine domestic producers and hinder economic growth.
Gian Marco Solas, Expert at the International BRICS Competition Law and Policy Centre, highlighted the role of collective actions in competition enforcement. Drawing on European experience, he emphasized that collective lawsuits and litigation funding can be effective tools for combating cartels, including in the grain sector. Although preparing multi-jurisdictional claims is complex, there are opportunities to attract financing and develop legal-tech platforms that enable farmers to participate and apply scientific methods to calculate damages.
The BRICS Working Group on Cartels was established pursuant to the resolution adopted at the 8th United Nations Conference to Review the UN Set of Competition Rules and Policies in October 2020. The International BRICS Competition Law and Policy Centre provides methodological and expert support for the Working Group’s activities.
