Why publishing Bangladesh Competition Commission judgments matters for all of us

In Bangladesh, if you want to win a cricket match, you have to know the rules. The same logic applies to business. Without clear, public rules, players either cheat, get confused, or sit out entirely. 

That is exactly why the Bangladesh Competition Commission (BCC) should start publishing its full final orders and judgements online — just like the umpires in any fair match should explain their decisions. It is not just good governance; it is good for business, education, investment, and — believe it or not — for your grocery bill too.

Levelling the playing field: What the world is doing

Around the world, competition authorities from the European Union's Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP) to India's CCI and Pakistan's CCP routinely publish their detailed judgements. These decisions are not buried in dusty drawers. They are available to the public, lawyers, students, journalists, and most importantly, businesses. The idea is simple: publish the decisions so that everyone knows what is fair, what is foul, and what will get you penalised.

Take for instance, the DG COMP's mammoth 374-page judgement in the Qualcomm predatory pricing case. Or India's CCI ruling in the Suo Motu Case No. 01 of 2021 clocking in at 156 pages. These are not bedtime stories, but they are powerful tools. They build trust, show consistency in law enforcement, and give businesses the clarity they need to operate without fear or favouritism.

Where we stand: The silent bench in Bangladesh

In Bangladesh, the silence is deafening. The BCC, despite its critical mandate under the Competition Act 2012, does not consistently publish its final orders or case rulings. For a country aspiring to graduate from Least Developed Country (LDC) status, this is like showing up for a university exam without a syllabus. Everyone is guessing, and few are confident.

This absence is a serious roadblock for legal education and research. The University of Dhaka has just thought to launch a master's-level course on competition law — others are expected to follow suit. But students and teachers are left empty-handed when it comes to Bangladeshi case law. Forget about textbooks — there is not even a decent case digest. If final orders were made public, they could serve as the foundational learning materials we so desperately need.

Good for business, great for law

Businesses, especially small and medium enterprises, often say they want "clarity" and "a level playing field." But how can they get that if the referee does not publish the match report?

Publishing judgements would allow enterprises to see what kind of behaviour gets penalised and what is safe. It helps compliance officers advise their firms. It helps investors assess legal risk. And it helps businesses understand how competition law is evolving. Imagine a dairy company trying to decide if a price hike is legal. A previously published BCC decision on a similar case would act like a compass.

Lawyers too need this information. Whether drafting a legal opinion or preparing a defence in a cartel case, access to previous BCC rulings is not a luxury — it is a necessity. The same goes for journalists, consumer groups, and policy wonks. Without access, everyone is flying blind.

Transparency is the new currency

Now let us talk about money — specifically, foreign money. Publishing BCC judgements might seem like a small thing, but it is actually a powerful tool for attracting foreign direct investment (FDI). Why? Because investors like transparency. They want to see that a country follows rules and enforces them fairly. If a regulator is transparent about how it makes decisions, investors feel safer bringing in their money.

Countries like Japan, South Korea, Singapore, India, and even Pakistan are already doing this. They publish competition rulings, and guess what? Their reputations have improved. So why should Bangladesh be left behind?

As we transition from LDC status and look to benefit from trade schemes like the EU's GSP+, transparency is not optional — it is expected. Development partners want proof that we are serious about rule of law and fair competition. A simple upload of a judgement might just do more than a hundred investment roadshows.

A case study in credibility: Hyundai Tucson in Pakistan

Need an example from our peers? Consider Pakistan's competition commission. On 15 April 2025, it published a 26-page decision penalising anti-competitive practices involving the Hyundai Tucson. It was public, reasoned, and balanced. It gave the company a fair hearing, explained the penalty, and sent a message to the market: play fair or pay up.

If BCC can do the same, it will not just earn applause — it will earn credibility. And credibility, in today's economy, is the best investment Bangladesh can make.

Let's not miss this bus

Of course, critics might say that publishing judgements will open the door to public scrutiny and even controversy. Yes, and that is the point. Transparency invites debate, yes, but also discipline. It ensures that regulators stay sharp, lawyers stay prepared, and businesses stay compliant.

Let us be honest — there is no downside to transparency unless you have something to hide. And we, as a nation on the move, have nothing to hide and everything to gain.

Publishing final orders isn't just a legal nicety. It's a national necessity. For Bangladesh, it's a step toward becoming not just a growing economy but a fair one. A competitive one. And most importantly, a confident one.

The gavel has spoken; now let the record speak too. It's time to put pen to paper. 

Mohd Khalid Abu Naser is the former director and non-governmental advisor (NGA) of the Bangladesh Competition Commission (BCC).

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and views of The Business Standard.