Criminal Sanction in the Enforcement of China’s Antimonopoly Act

China set to revise its antimonopoly Law with more aggressive provisions. One of the fundamental changes is that criminal liabilities are allowed through Article 57, which has specified neither the underlying conduct nor the corresponding liabilities, though it opens the door to further legislation and regulation. The selection of sanctions for the enforcement of Japan's antimonopoly act and US s' Sherman act are very different, especially in the functions of criminal sanctions. China needs to understand the experience and lessons of the US and Japan in implementing antimonopoly laws and correctly handle the relationship between several sanctions, such as administrative surcharges, criminal fines against firms, imprisonment, criminal fines against individuals, and private damage remedies