Category: Money tips Release Date: 2007-02-23
The SFC received from the administrative law enforcement and the judiciary so that some degree of quasi-judicial power. This borrowed from the world's most stringent measures in the stock market, aims to improve the powers of the SFC in order to enhance the efficiency of the securities market law enforcement.
The SFC has recently issued the "freezing, seizure implementation method," is targeting the implementation of judicial power. As a result, troubled by China's stock market efficiency of the regulator will be able to be decreased greatly. SFC even more powerful at the same time, there should be thorn in the side feeling. The reason is simple, responsibilities and powers and so on, when the SFC have greater powers, and this corresponds to assume more responsibility, and to be honest and efficient supervision to convince the public, will be quasi-judicial power to allow degrees to the SFC is a right choice.
I have written that, for the Commission to obtain quasi-judicial power, should not be given high expectations, since the Commission is not divorced from the reality, he has his own history of the survival path, look to the Commission Bao overnight become a cold-faced is no more than blue sky complex cause trouble, it will only usher in yet another disappointment.
From inception to the Commission by the end of June 2005, a total of 438 published administrative punishment decisions, involving 536 units and 1066 individuals, and the intensity of China's capital market is clearly illegal and disproportionate density of non-compliance and therefore can not win the trust of the industry and the ordinary investors. In fact, in Guangxia, China Southern Securities, has exposed the deep development of a series of problems, the efficiency of the Commission itself, as well as restrictions imposed by, have been repeatedly questioned.
If there is a lack of previous quasi-judicial powers to make an excuse, then, since the quasi-judicial powers to obtain the moment, the SFC can not be avoided. However, the published "Implementation Measures" under the freezing, seizure procedures, efficiency can be guaranteed, but also doubtful. "After legal review, reported the China Securities Regulatory Commission approval of the main person in charge, producing a written decision, notice, by law enforcement officers," during which it is necessary to coordinate with the legal department also requires the executive to report the process, as long as the administrative efficiency of the past understand, it is difficult for such procedural arrangements have much confidence.
Is even more regrettable is that the quasi-judicial power, not out of heavy criminal and civil set pattern of light. "Implementation of the system" provides for strict seizure procedures, for "failure to prescribed procedures for the freeze, seizure, given the legal property of the parties to cause significant losses" and only one, "according to the law of compensation; right directly in charge and persons directly responsible for administrative sanctions. constitutes a crime, be held criminally responsible. " So lightly, whether it is broader than the question already?
Terms of the arrangements from the point of view, the Commission would like to strict procedures to reduce the incidence of such incidents, but the ex post facto accountability and civil liability in order for handling the legal and property of others who may feel awe, in the empowerment of the same time, not its duties and powers in order to match the responsibilities and obligations, can only be created so that those who mocked handling heart. SFC multiple punishment does not form a deterrent on the market, listed companies and brokerage large irregularities, it is closely related with the neglect of civil compensation.
To save the cost of implementation, such as repeatedly opening penalty system, but the amount of fines abnormal low, right is no different from nowhere near those penalized. ST hops due to disclosure violations by the Commission a fine of 600,000 yuan, and investors could suffer up to 22 billion giant, a difference of 3666 times. Such cases and even a potential violators will produce the reverse prompt, even if was arrested and also no big deal. Today, the penalties become more severe the Commission, but listed Netease Fu, as inadvertently misreported as one million U.S. dollars contract revenue, the U.S. court for compensation by small and medium investors 4.35 million U.S. dollars, compared with almost the Nasdaq delisting, the pros and cons at a glance.
Neglect of civil compensation and replaced by severe administrative regulation and quasi-judicial power, the crucial point is that the investor's recourse to a face-lift to become the executive branch the right punishment, the executive power and the legal pros and cons of the relationship is not smooth, it so difficult to safeguard the rights of the people has also become all the responsibilities are borne by the Administration inertia. Unfortunately, the Commission's approach has not let us see the spark of respect for civil rights.
Allow the Commission enforcement both effective and prudent, impaired the interests of the civil accountability is probably the most effective weapon. Of course, this applies not only to the SFC, and all have discretion in administrative law enforcement departments apply.
