Faced with limited financial, technical and human resources, competition authorities often have to decide which actions are most worth pursuing, knowing that this inevitably means that others may not be possible. These choices may concern whether to open or continue an investigation, how to respond to a complaint, or whether to pursue a prosecution in relation to an alleged infringement.
Because competition authorities are largely independent expert bodies, they are often well placed to assess the trade-offs required to make enforcement effective and aligned with their objectives. At the same time, prosecutorial discretion raises important questions of accountability, transparency and legal certainty. It is therefore crucial to understand how authorities can prioritise cases in a principled and consistent way, while preserving flexibility and making the best use of their available resources.
In June 2026, the OECD will hold a roundtable on the topic to examine the rationale for case prioritisation and prosecutorial discretion by competition authorities. The discussion will also consider how case selection relates to broader priority setting, including the balance between enforcement, advocacy, market studies, research and ex-post assessments.
This page contains all session information and materials.
