JURISDICTIONAL OVERLAP BETWEEN THE MALAYSIAN COMPETITION COMMISSION AND THE SECURITIES COMMISSION IN MERGER REVIEW

Abstract

The introduction of merger control provisions through the proposed amendment to Malaysia’s Competition Act 2010 (Act 712) represents a pivotal development in the country’s competition law framework. Merger control is a fundamental component of competition regulation globally, ensuring that business consolidations do not create monopolistic structures that harm market competition and consumer welfare. Many jurisdictions, including those in Southeast Asia, have long implemented such measures, and Malaysia’s adoption of merger review aligns it with international best practices. However, implementing this amendment raises critical concerns regarding jurisdictional overlaps between the Malaysian Competition Commission (MyCC) and the Securities Commission (SC). Both regulatory bodies have oversight responsibilities that may intersect, leading to potential enforcement inefficiencies, procedural delays, and disruptions to merger transactions. Without clear coordination mechanisms, businesses may face regulatory uncertainty, hindering investment and economic growth. This study examines the potential jurisdictional challenges and explores how effective inter-agency collaboration can be achieved. Employing a mixed-method approach that integrates doctrinal legal analysis with comparative insights from India and Singapore, this paper identifies three key issues: differences in legal definitions, information asymmetry, and conflicting timelines. Based on these findings, the study proposes institutional coordination mechanisms and the harmonisation of procedural timelines to enhance inter-agency collaboration. These recommendations aim to promote regulatory clarity, minimise enforcement conflicts, and foster a competitive yet business-friendly economic environment, ultimately strengthening Malaysia’s competition law enforcement and economic governance.