SEBI suspends its ULIPs order – BUT ONLY PARTLY!
Written by
on
Comments
2 responses to “SEBI suspends its ULIPs order – BUT ONLY PARTLY!”
-
At the very outset, thank you Mr. Thakur for these two posts on the ULIP-ban issue. Regarding the partial suspension of the SEBI order and its stance that there has to be no fresh sale of ULIPs, it seems to me that the recent uncertainty over the issue will have that effect regardless of the true remit of the SEBI order and the reputational sanction that has been indirectly been been brought to bear on this product will keep the consumers (or investors?) away from it freezing the market for ULIPS.The most hassle-free way was for the fourteen aggrieved parties to move a higher forum — either SAT or the High Court(227)/Supreme Court under Article 136 and for the IRDA to file an amicus in support of the petitioners. Thats how mature democracies and developed financial market regulators handle it. The recent F-cubed claim in the US sup. Ct. (National Australian Bank v. Morrison)is a case in point. IRDA's diktat to its constituencies to disregard SEBI's formal order was non-est (as there was no legal ground for it to launch itself) thus and gave a (unnecessary) political slant to what was an easy legal recourse. If India is to move away from the emerging market to an "emerged" market, rent-seeking public bureaucracies ought to be reined in. Indeed, I see in IRDA's intervention, Stigler's theory of regulatory capture @ work.Thanks again.
LikeLike
-
Hi Jayant,You are spot on with your observations!The original order of SEBI was under Section 12(1B) of the SEBI act. Being a quasi-judicial order it cannot be set aside. SEBI should ideally issue another order under the same section to set aside the earlier one.I think the press release is merely clarificatory in nature. The tone of the press release suggests SEBI's reluctance to budge from its stand.Kind Regards,Lawman
LikeLike
Leave a comment