By Tom Fairless
LONDON--Europe's top competition official launched a robust
defense of her agency's independence on Thursday, denying
suggestions she has pursued political goals in pursuing major
overseas companies like Apple Inc. and Google Inc.
Margrethe Vestager, who took over as the EU's antitrust chief in
November, rocked the business world in April by filing f ormal
charges against Google and Russian energy giant OAO Gazprom in the
same week--highly sensitive moves against two of the world's
biggest and best-connected companies, from which her predecessor,
Joaquín Almunia, had held back for years.
Ms. Vestager has also repeatedly deepened an investigation into
the tax practices of multinationals that has embroiled companies
including Amazon.com Inc. and Starbucks Corp.
Speaking on Thursday at Chatham House in London, Margrethe
Vestager said that while the decision to prioritize specific
sectors, such as energy and information technology, was political,
she approached individual cases fairly and in accordance with the
law.
"Some commentators have been quick to make political
inferences," Ms. Vestager said.
But "independence is simply nonnegotiable," she said.
The European Commission, the bloc's executive arm and top
antitrust authority, acts as prosecutor, judge and jury in
competition cases, giving it greater powers than U.S. antitrust
agencies, which must defend their cases before a judge.
Ms. Vestager admitted that the commission does consciously
prioritize antitrust cases where it believes that action "would
have a multiplier effect with [its] wider political
priorities."
The Commission has announced a number of key objectives for its
current five-year term, including deepening the bloc's single
market in the digital and energy sectors, and ensuring all
companies pay their fair share of tax.
"There should be no doubt that I will do my part to advise the
commission's broader objectives," Ms. Vestager said.
But to the question of whether EU competition policy is
politicized in individual cases, Ms Vestager said the answer is "a
resounding no."
She stressed that her agency has to defend its decisions against
legal challenges in the courts.
"We are committed to the principles of fairness, good
administration, transparency and good process," she said.
"There is simply no room to spare...for political
interference."
Write to Tom Fairless at tom.fairless@wsj.com
Access Investor Kit for Gazprom OAO
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=RU0007661625
Access Investor Kit for Gazprom OAO
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US3682872078
Access Investor Kit for Google, Inc.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US38259P5089
Access Investor Kit for Google, Inc.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US38259P7069
Access Investor Kit for Starbucks Corp.
Visit
http://www.companyspotlight.com/partner?cp_code=P479&isin=US8552441094
Subscribe to WSJ: http://online.wsj.com?mod=djnwires