Ship agents association's cartelisation

On January 7 the Competition Commission of Pakistan impounded the record of the Pakistan Ship Agents Association.
On very next day, January 8, Joint Secretary, (Cabinet Division) wrote to the Collector of Customs (Preventive) that the Competition Commission of Pakistan Act would cover the cause of all the activities relating to exchange of undue high prices/fees by the freight forwarders as considered in the meeting of stakeholders held in the Cabinet Division on 2 December 2010 and wanted the Collector to communicate to Competition Commission of Pakistan for their intervention through their enforcement mechanism rather than wasting time in convening meetings. The letter of the Joint Secretary, Cabinet Division, adds: there is no need to enact another law, and, Clause 3(3) (a&b) under the heading "abuse of dominant position in chapter-2B and Clause 10(2)(b) under the heading "Deceptive Marketing Practices" and chapter-2 would resolve the issue.
I am profoundly aghast, flabbergast what prompted the Cabinet Division to write without considering whether CCP law covers the issue. The referred clauses do not resolve the chronic problem. Chapter II reads: (a) limiting production, sales, and unreasonable increases in price of other unfair trading conditions; (b) price discrimination by charging different customers prices for the same goods or services from different customers in the absence of objective justifications that may justify different prices. 10(2)(b) reads: distribution of false or misleading information to consumers, including the distribution of information lacking a reasonable basis, related to the price, character, method or place of production, properties, suitability for use, or quality of goods. The issue, on the contrary, is coercive recoveries in violation of international/national law/Convention/ Rules of i. Unwarranted, not justifiable, not legal charges for service not provided and taking advantage of dominant position.
Draft Maritime Logistics Service Providers Registration Bill 2010 proposes that maritime logistics service providers shall publish tariff for services - task offered by them to service receiver other than the task included in contract of carriage for which the freight is pre-paid. Service receivers to have the right to question additional, hidden charges or inclusion of any other service which the service provider has already been paid for under the contract of carriage. It is fair, just and equitable to frame law rules to resolve the problem. Oblique reference that the proposed law covers Freight Forwarders is significant and misleading. In fact, the draft law covers all the service providers - shipping companies/agents, terminal operators and other incidental service providers.
The issue is under active consideration of the Federal Tax Ombudsman, the Joint Secretary, Cabinet Division, would better have refrained writing what he wrote.