Informist, Thursday, Jun 15, 2023 By Rajesh Gajra MUMBAI – Last month, the Securities and Exchange Board of India came out with a consultation paper to deal with unexplained suspicious trading activities in the securities market, including a draft set of regulations and the rationale behind them. At first glance, not only does the proposed SEBI (Prohibition of Unexplained Suspicious Trading Activities in the Securities Market) Regulations, 2023, look like an overkill, but also seem to portend a ‘guilty till proven innocent’ regime. SEBI’s raison d'etre for bringing the regulations is the challenge it is facing in gathering direct evidence due to the usage of sophisticated technology such as disappearing messages in social media or messaging platforms by entities who may be violating norms on front running, price manipulation, and insider trading. SEBI said in the consultation paper that it had always followed the 'preponderance of probability' principle to hold persons liable for breach of norms in stock market trading such as 'pump and dump' schemes, front running and insider trading. But "the use of innovative, vanishing, and encrypted methods of private communication, as well as complex and untraceable funding arrangements, makes it impossible to establish the preponderance of probability," it said. Innovations in technology will always lead to good use and bad use. The misuse of such technologies is a problem for all regulatory bodies worldwide, particularly when it pertains to serious acts of misconduct. But the solution, as put forward by SEBI in the draft norms, is not to forcibly put a "deemed to be violating the securities laws" tag on select trades which the regulator finds suspicious. Besides other fundamental problems with such a presumption, market participants who make legitimate use of innovative technologies will also get caught in the vortex of regulatory suspicion. As per the draft of SEBI’s proposed new norms, suspicious trading activity is defined as "any trading activity of a person or a group of connected persons found to be exhibiting unusual trading pattern in a security or a group of securities where such unusual trading pattern coincides with material non-public information in relation to a security or a group of securities." One problem with this definition is that the scope is very wide and entails a high degree of subjectivity. To be sure, the new norms do say that the unusual trading pattern will mean a repeated pattern of trading activity which "involves a substantial change in risk taken in one or more securities over short period of time... (and which) consequently delivered abnormal profits or averted abnormal losses during the period." But there is no objective quantification of what constitutes a “substantial change in risk”, “short period of time”, and “abnormal profits or averted abnormal losses.” There is also a potential problem that the trading data chosen to be analysed by SEBI or the stock exchanges may end up being selective. It runs the risk of arbitrariness - the risk that the regulator may pick up cases they wish to punish so long as they can show suspicion. While there will always be a degree of subjectivity in the manner in which any self-acting investigating agency picks up its cases, it must be based on some sound preliminary evidence. There is also a problem in what follows next after the regulator concludes that the trading activity was suspicious. SEBI will open an official probe charging the entities and persons involved and show cause notices will be issued. This is a departure from the current procedure, under which it issues show cause notices only after collective hard or circumstantial data to show as evidence. In the next step, under the proposed new norms, the concerned entities and persons charged will have to rebut the same with not just an explanation but also with documentary evidence. In some cases it simply won’t be possible for market participants to rebut while adhering to by way of high standards and stipulations such as “documentary evidence.” For instance, if a trader or an investor has traded on hearsay market rumours and not due to an elaborate manipulative scheme, how will he or she prove that is so with documents? Going ahead, if SEBI contends that the charged persons and entities "failed to effectively rebut the allegations and thus have engaged in unexplained suspicious trading activity," it shall go the full way of taking enforcement action such as a freeze on their demat and bank accounts, penalties and, a bar on their securities market activities. SEBI must re-evaluate the need for having separate regulations for suspicious trades. Existing regulations prohibiting insider trading, price manipulation, and front running activities, provide enough leverage to show a preponderance of probability. These also have safeguards in place to ensure that an undesired regulatory overreach does not take place. If all regulators worldwide go about deeming dealings or activities of market participants they regulate as violative based on mere suspicion then the securities markets will end up becoming a regulatory wild west, causing massive inconvenience to genuine investors and traders. LATEST ANNOUNCEMENTS * Brokers must upstream client funds to clearing corporation, says SEBI * SEBI issues framework for 'execution-only platform' for direct MFs * SEBI allows MFs to participate in repo transactions involving CP-CDs * SEBI paper for more underlying ownership data disclosures by FPIs * SEBI for halving listing timeline to 3 days from public issue closure * SEBI for tighter controls on flexible daily price bands in F&O stocks ORDERS, ADJUDICATION PROCEEDINGS * SEBI bars Zee Ent's Chandra, Goenka from directorship of listed cos * SEBI fines Brightcom Group, promoters for insider trading norm breach * SAT quashes SEBI's licence annulment order against Brickwork Ratings * SEBI cancels Karvy Broking's brokerage license for breach of norms * SEBI fines Educomp, 2 directors 31 mln rupees for fraud in financials DATA FROM SEBI
| Date | Unit | Latest | Previous | |
| FII/FPI net equity investment | Jun 13 | US$ mln | 267.06 | (-)72.09 |
| FII/FPI net debt investment | Jun 13 | US$ mln | (-)664.77 | 28.54 |
| DIIs net equity investment# | Jun 12 | bln rupees | 15.36 | 8.84 |
| DIIs net debt investment# | Jun 12 | bln rupees | 5.48 | (-)0.44 |
© Informist Media Pvt. Ltd. 2023. All rights reserved.
