ERDEM-NEWSLETTER-2018-metin

77 COMPETITION LAW or it may provide them with electronic copies. On the other hand, the information provided within the scope of Article 6(3) and 9(3) of the Leniency Regulation, or the Authority’s internal correspondence that justifies, or has the quality of accusing, the evidence shall be examined at the Authority’s head office. The Recent Practice The recent Board decisions set forth that the method of using the right to access files has become a controversial topic. This is due to the efficient use of the relevant right has critical importance for the inves- tigation parties, since efficient access to files affects the defense power of the parties’ and, therefore, has the power to change the course of the investigations. The Board has evaluated a number of file access requests in the investigation concerning corporate loan markets 1 . Accordingly, the Board has decided that the requesting parties may evaluate the documents obtained from private sector public persons (“Authority’s internal correspondence”) and the leniency request along with its an- nexes in the Authority’s head office. The Board has not allowed the requesting parties to take any electronic versions or photocopies of the documents. It is also noted that the parties cannot take any records during the file access and, within that scope, they cannot bring any device/objects with them which may take record of the documents, such as telephones, recording machine, memory sticks, cameras or notebooks. The Board took a similar approach in a recently finalized inves- tigation that was conducted in the flat glass market. In parallel with the banking investigation, the Board decided that the requesting party may evaluate the documents obtained from dealers (“Authority’s in- ternal correspondence”) at the Authority’s head office. The Board has not allowed the requesting party to take any electronic version or photocopies of the documents 2 . 1 The Board decisions: No:17-16/234-99 (15 May 2017), No: 17-16/235-100 (15 May 2017), No: 17-18/273-117 (1 June 2017), No: 17-18/274-118 (1 June 2017), No: 17-18/272-116 (1 June 2017). 2 The Board decisions, No: 17-22/352-157, 13 July 2017.