Økonomisk Kriminalitet Nordiske Perspektiver - Scandinavian ...

documents, which upon investigation revealed the existence of a cartel involving
all oil and petrol products offered by the companies as well as extensive market
sharing arrangements and collusive tendering practices. When the Competition
Authority made its findings public in October 2004 it became clear that the oil
companies had for nearly 9 years engaged in the cartel activity (The Competition
Authority, 2004). The CA report describes frequent and organized meetings
between the CEOs of the oil companies as well as other employees, where
decisions were made about the illegal activity. The report presents evidence,
including e-mails, that indicates numerous incidents of price fixing activity. Some
of the e-mails revealed attempts to cover up the violations, where contacts were
instructed to delete messages. The oil companies announced that they would file
suit before the regular courts and seek annulment of CAC’s ruling (The
Competition Authority, 2004). The appeal has still not been decided in the courts.
It was perhaps with the oil scandal and the ensuing publicity that the general
public in Iceland became aware of the damage that corporations can cause. Public
debate about corporate criminality has been increasing over the last 15 years. The
case caused public outrage and subsequently debate started to grow about the
need to strengthen the resources of the CA. In 2004 the minister for business
affairs had appointed a committee to form a government policy on the Icelandic
business environment. A bill was put forward in 2005 based on proposals from the
committee, with the aim to strengthen the Competition Authorities and make it
more efficient. Efficiency of the organization and administration of the CA was
improved by moving regulation of consumer related issues such as unlawful
business practices and transparency of markets under the Consumer agency.
However there wasn’t consensus in the Parliament about some of the proposals
which recommended that the CA would be granted more power, such as
authorization to search the private residences of CEOs with suspicion of illegal
activity. Despite much public debate at the time about the need to change the laws
so that individuals could be held accountable for price-fixing, such amendments to
the laws weren’t included in the bill (The Competition Authority, 2005).
In 2006 after much dispute between the CA and the National commissioner of
police about proper channels and exchange of case information, charges were
106