Former heads of the Authority for Fair Competition and Consumer Protection (AFCCP) O.Magnai and T.Ayursaikhan have started an argument concerning revoked fines.
O.Magnai resign from the job in December 2014 to T.Ayursaikhan, who also gave the job a year later in December 2015.
Last week, T.Ayursaikhan said in an interview with local media that O.Magnai imposed fines and then revoked them soon after signing agreements with companies. In response to the the interview, O.Magnai held a press conference on Monday and claimed that T.Ayursaikhan was the one who revoked big fines and took an example on NIK LLC’s fine. O.Magnai said that he will sue T.Ayursaikhan for defamation. On Wednesday, T.Ayursaikhan held a press conference and presented evidence that allegedly supports that NIK LLC was fined and that he didn’t defame O.Magnai.
T.Ayursaikhan claimed that O.Magnai imposes fines and revokes them after making agreements with companies.
“When O.Magnai was the Head of the AFCCP, he imposed large amounts of fines on home owners’ associations and other retail chains on the basis that they violated consumer rights and interests. He soon revoked them before a hearing and made an agreement,” he said.
During his press conference on Wednesday, he said that he will “take full responsibility for his words” because they’re all facts. T.Ayursaikhan then showed documents where O.Magnai had imposed 268 million MNT in fines on MIAT and Genco Tour companies, 10 million MNT on Tsolmon Us Company, and certain amounts on other companies, including Khatan Suljee and Buyan LLC.
O.Magnai clarified on the issue.
“There were three big retail chains at the time. They were all imposed a fine for the same reason. During the hearing, all of them notified to resolve the violations and signed a settlement agreement that ordered the three stores to pay the fines without any dispute should the situation repeats itself,” said O.Magnai.
Last Monday, O.Magnai said during a press conference, “In 2012, NIK LLC was imposed a fine of 4.9 billion MNT for creating dearth of fuel without a basis. The AFCCP won in three court sessions, but the court ruled to reevaluate the fine amount based on price evaluations of A-92 and diesel fuels. I personally didn’t want to resolve an issue involving huge amounts of money alone, and created a workgroup consisting of five people. I gave my position before the issue was resolved,” he said.
O.Magnai claimed that after T.Ayursaikhan took office, he withdrew NIK LLC’s status as a monopoly, which led the fine to be revoked, and that he illegally fired his workgroup in charge of the issue.
“T.Ayursaikhan is defaming me,” said O.Magnai.
On April 13, T.Ayursaikhan said that O.Magnai’s statement on Monday was false. “Before I start the conference, let me make something clear. My interview was published just recently. Why is it that an interview I gave when I was the Head of the AFCCP published just now?”he asked. He added that he wasn’t trying to defame O.Magnai in relation to the election.
“Inspector J.Ochirkhuyag said he hadn’t received estimation information again when I took this position. But J.Ochirkhuyag had received the fine information, and had the estimation already. It was found during investigation that he had hidden the facts. By law, court decisions should be implemented from the day it is ruled. It is proven by this that officials led by O.Magnai slowed this process down on purpose,” T.Ayursaikhan added.
According to T.Ayursaikhan, NIK LLC submitted a request to revoke the fine but he refused, and transferred it to the Independent Authority Against Corruption on December 16, 2015. He said that NIK LLC paid their fines and showed a document related to the fine.
“The original document was lost from the AFCCP. Since it couldn’t be found, we decided to fine them as stated in the law. According to Article 27.2 of the Law on Competition, a company is to be imposed a fine of up to five percent of the enterprise owner’s net worth. As NIK LLC had a capital of approximately 54 billion MNT, they were fined 2.3 billion MNT. The inspector who was working on this case coincidentally found the court material from the Administrative Court and gave it to me,” he said.
T.Ayursaikhan added, “When I took the job, government agencies decided to lay off 15 percent of the staff. Three people were laid off through this decision. When I took the job, three people resigned. One took a maternity leave and one left for a training.”