The Competition Superintendence (CS) disagrees with the way the Administrative Contentious Tribunal (ACT) of the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) admitted the suit filed by MOLSA.

1. Press Release C.08 - 09
El Salvador, February 11th, 2009.
Agreement amongst Competitors
CS questions criterion of SCJ
The Competition Superintendence (CS) disagrees with the way the Administrative
Contentious Tribunal (ACT) of the Supreme Court of Justice (SCJ) admitted the
suit filed by MOLSA.
The CS disagrees with the ACT of the SCJ for the admission of the suit. Said suit was
“The CS has filed by MOLSA, in order not to pay the fine and comply with the cease of the conduct,
requested the ACT of imposed by the Board of Directors (BD) of the CS, after proving the existence of an
the SCJ to respect agreement amongst competitors.
the legal competence
of the CS. The SC filed a recourse requesting the ACT to revoke the resolution admitting the suit,
Furthermore, has due to the fact that said admission is not precise and expressly rejects the CS´ request
proven to the ACT to the ACT not to resolve with respect to substantive aspects which are of the exclusive
that an eventual competence of the CS.
precautionary remedy
With the aforementioned decision, the CS´ right to defense is jeopardized. Furthermore,
would harm public
the ACT would be invading attributions and powers that the law was vested the CS
welfare, the way the with. On one hand, the ACT did not clarify the elements that would be part of the
wheat flour market dispute and, on the other, the ACT is trying to analyze within the contentious
functions in our administrative process substantive issues that dully correspond to Competition Law,
country, and reserved exclusively to the Executive Branch through the CS.
definitively, the
consumers´ budgets. In addition to requesting the ACT to revoke the admission on the terms executed, the
The disputed acts CS pronounced itself with respect to the precautionary remedy requested by MOLSA
were executed and explained to the ACT the harm to public welfare, to the way the wheat flour market
pursuant to the functions in our country, and definitively, to the consumers´ budgets, if such
legality principle and precautionary remedy was ordered and the effects of the disputed acts were
suspended.
other constitutional
and legal provisions,”
Likewise, the CS informed the ACT about the existence of the disputed acts,
said Celina Escolan emphasizing that the same were ordered pursuant to the legality principle and to other
Suay, President of constitutional, legal and regulatory provisions.
the BD of the CS.
On April 3rd, 2008, the CS obtained the judicial order to search MOLSA´s premises,
amongst others. The raid was executed with the cooperation of MOLSA, where the
evidence collected was very useful for the BD of the CS to sanction the aforementioned
company. Said search with judicial order was the first one carried out by the CS, since
the inspections that were permitted before the Competition Law amendments of
October 2007, in force since November 2007, required prior notice to the economic
agents.
Edificio Madreselva, Primer Nivel, Calzada El Almendro y 1ª Avenida El Espino, Urbanización Madreselva.
Antiguo Cuscatlán, El Salvador.
Conmutador (503) 2523-6600, Fax (503) 2523-6625 Comunicaciones (503) 2523-6616

2. Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Article 86 of the Constitution: “The public power comes from the people. The
Branches of the Government shall exercise it independently within their respective attributions and
competences established by this Constitution and the laws. The attributions of the Branches of the
Government are not delegable…”.
Background
April 1st, 2008 The CS ex-officio ordered the initiation of the sanctioning procedure against
MOLSA and HARISA.
April 2nd, 2008 The CS requested the search with judicial order of MOLSA´s and HARISA´s
premises.
April 3rd, 2008 The CS obtained the judicial orders to search MOLSA and HARISA.
The CS notified the companies the decision ordering the formal investigation.
The CS simultaneously carried out the searches with prior judicial order in
each of the companies´ premises.
July 1st, 2008 The CS concluded the investigation, integrated the file, and sent it to the BD for
final ruling.
September 4th,2008 The BD issued the final resolution.
September 12th, 2008 MOLSA and HARISA filed the revision recourse.
October 14th, 2008 The BD of the CS confirmed the final resolution.
October 28th, 2008 MOLSA filed an administrative contentious suit before the ACT of the SCJ
against the resolution issued by the BD of the CS.
November 13th, 2008 The BD of the CS requested the ACT of the SCJ to be heard prior to the
issuance of the precautionary remedy requested in process initiated by MOLSA.
February 9th, 2009 The ACT of the SCJ notified the BD of the CS the admission of MOLSA´s suit,
rejected the limitation requested by the BD of said admission, and conferred a
hearing in order to make a statement before deciding on the precautionary
remedy requested.
February 10th, 2009 The BD of the CS requested the ACT of the SCJ to revoke the admission of the
suit and. based on the eventuality principle, rendered the requested report,
answered the conferred hearing, and asked not to order the precautionary
remedy.
Edificio Madreselva, Primer Nivel, Calzada El Almendro y 1ª Avenida El Espino, Urbanización Madreselva.
Antiguo Cuscatlán, El Salvador.
Conmutador (503) 2523-6600, Fax (503) 2523-6625 Comunicaciones (503) 2523-6616