The Competition Commission of Pakistan (CCP) has confirmed that the Pakistan Poultry Association colluded to inflate poultry prices. Consequently, the authority fined the association PKR 25 million (around USD 85,000) after a competition tribunal upheld the CCP’s ruling.
CCP Confirms Price-Fixing Allegations
The CCP, which oversees fair competition in Pakistan, accused the Pakistan Poultry Association of forming a cartel to raise poultry prices artificially. Such collusion violates Pakistan’s Competition Act, which bans agreements that limit market competition.
According to the CCP, the tribunal upheld its earlier decision. Specifically, it confirmed that the association coordinated with other members to fix prices. Initially, the association had appealed the fine, requesting a reduction. However, the tribunal reviewed the evidence and maintained the ruling.
Fine Reduced on Appeal
Initially, the CCP had fined the association PKR 50 million (approximately USD 170,000). After reviewing the appeal, the tribunal lowered the fine to PKR 25 million. Moreover, it ordered the association to pay the fine within 15 days.
This decision shows our commitment to ensuring businesses operate fairly in Pakistan, the CCP said. Furthermore, it added that price-fixing harms consumers and distorts market competition. Therefore, the commission will continue to monitor such practices closely.
Impact on the Poultry Industry
This ruling may significantly affect Pakistan’s poultry sector, which provides a major source of protein for millions of people. The country produces over 1.5 million tons of poultry meat every year. Consequently, any artificial price hike directly affects households and can worsen food insecurity.
Moreover, market experts believe the CCP’s action sends a warning to other associations. This case shows that regulators will not tolerate anti-competitive behavior, said an independent analyst. In addition, it highlights the importance of transparent business practices.
Wider Crackdown on Price Cartels
This is not the first time the CCP has acted against collusion. For example, authorities recently fined several sugar mills in Punjab for conspiring to fix sugarcane prices. These actions demonstrate the commission’s ongoing effort to stop price manipulation in key commodities.
Furthermore, regulators argue that enforcing competition laws strengthens the market and protects consumers. Analysts add that consistent enforcement encourages investment and ensures fair pricing in essential sectors.
Conclusion
The PKR 25 million fine highlights the CCP’s vigilance against cartelization and price-fixing. Therefore, authorities emphasize that poultry producers must comply with competition laws.
As a result, consumers and analysts will watch the sector closely to see if these measures lead to fairer prices and more competitive practices.
