A comparative analysis of merger control mechanisms in Pakistan and India is important because of their common legal and economic roots but have different regulatory outcomes. Many developing economies lack financial resources which are required to conduct overarching merger reviews. Moreover, their merger-related legal frameworks might lack clear details and are not fully developed. Countries shifting from government-controlled economies might not consider promoting competition as important. Furthermore, the importance of protecting competitive market structures can eventually be given less value than industrial goals While India’s Competition Act of 2002, overseen by the CCI (Competition Commission of India), lays down a comprehensive and well-structured framework, the approaches of both countries offer valuable contrasts worth exploring with mandatory pre-merger notifications, strict timelines to capture digital mergers, ensuring adaptability to modern markets. In contrast, Pakistan’s Competition Act of 2010, enforced by the CCP (Competition Commission of Pakistan), faces several hurdles. These include low financial thresholds that tend to capture even mid-sized or foreign mergers unnecessarily, unclear rules on how the law applies beyond its borders, and uneven enforcement in practice. India’s strict penalties and mandatory approval regime discourage non-compliance, while Pakistan’s lighter fines and political influence weaken the regulator’s independence. By drawing lessons from India’s merger control framework, the research aims to offer practical reforms for improving Pakistan’s competition law regime and ensuring a fairer, more competitive market environment. The comparative analysis of the competition law frameworks in Pakistan and India is to illuminate how two neighboring countries with shared colonial histories, similar legal systems, and parallel economic challenges have diverged in the adoption and enforcement of their respective competition regimes. India is chosen as the comparator due to its geographical proximity, analogous economic development trajectory, and the striking similarities in legal traditions and institutional structures, both countries enacted modern competition laws within a few years of each other, drawing from international models and responding to similar external pressures such as WTO reforms.121 The purpose of this analysis is to critically examine the regulatory strengths and weaknesses of each system, scrutinize procedural efficiency and enforcement mechanisms, and identify best practices that may inform future reforms. By evaluating the distinct approaches and outcomes in India and Pakistan, the chapter aims to provide nuanced insights into how legal transplantation, institutional engagement, and local context shape the effectiveness of competition law enforcement in South Asia.122
Farid et al. (Tue,) studied this question.