This article addresses the Egyptian competition regime’s adoption of type II errors (under enforcement) in hardcore cartel cases. This article provides an analysis of the Egyptian Cement Cartel Case, and draws general conclusions drawn from it. This article explores the extent to which the fine imposed in the aforementioned case (the maximum fine at the time) was sufficient enough to recoup the cartel’s overcharges and to create the necessary deterrence effect for future anticompetitive practices in general and from creating cartels in particular.
This article further explores an alternative approach to addressing concerns about the adequacy of a fine sentence in light of the applicability of an imprisonment sanction impeded within the Egyptian Penal Code. Moreover, this article examines the limits of this alternative approach, and how it could be practically enforced by Egyptian courts.
Interviews with senior judicial figures in the Egyptian legal system were conducted to explore the applicability and limitations of the imprisonment approach. The assessment is not limited to qualitative data, however, but also encompasses quantitative data to further support the findings. As a result, it was found that imprisonment sanctions would eventually result in better enforcement policies. That is to say that fines were found not to be the optimal sanctioning mechanism since they are either extremely low or impossibly high.World Competition