Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Reforming the Regulatory State


Affiliations
1 Chairperson, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, New Delhi, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


The rise of regulators to share governance with Government is now a hard reality and governance through regulators probably constitutes the most important governance reforms in the last century. A regulator sits in the middle of a hierarchy of agencies: Government and economic agents. It generally does not share the ‘social’ obligations of Government; nor is it subject to the pressures of ‘interest’ groups. It provides the same level playing field to all kinds of participants without fear or favour. It builds the expertise matching the complexities of the task and evolves processes to enforce authority rapidly and proactively. It operates at arm’s length from government, insulated from daily political pressures and embedding their decisions in technical expertise. But there are significant concerns due to the fusion of legislative, executive, and judicial powers in one entity; Governments continue to remain accountable for the governance carried out through the regulator, thereby posing an example of the classical principal-agent problem. India has now more than two decades of experience with governance through regulators, It has been increasingly felt that a comprehensive review of the experience so far with a view to learn to improve the spacing and design of the regulators within the constitutional schema to make them more effective is the need of the hour. This paper undertakes this review on the basis of which it attempts to propose a more effective regulatory framework.

Keywords

No Keywords.
User
Subscription Login to verify subscription
Notifications
Font Size

  • Acemoglu, D., J. Simon, and J.A. Robinson, 2001; "The Colonial Origins of Comparative Development: An Empirical Investigation", The American Economic Review, Vol. 91, No. 5.
  • Acemoglu, D. and J.A. Robinson, 2012; Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, Crown Publishers, New York.
  • Acharya, V.V., et. al., 2011; Market Failures and Regulatory Failures: Lessons from Past and Present Financial Crises, ADBIWorking Paper Series No. 264, Asian Development Bank Institute, Phillipines, Manila.
  • AERAI,2011; Order No.13/2010-11 dated January 12: Matter of Regulatory Philosophy and Approach in Economic Regulation of Airport Operators, Airport Economic Regulatory Authority of India, New Delhi.
  • Anant, T C A and J. Singh, 2006; "Structuring Regulation: Constitutional and Legal Frame in India", Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 41, No. 2,
  • Ayres, I. and J. Braithwaite, 1992; Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate, Oxford University Press, New York.
  • Bajpai,G. N., 2004;"AHistorical Perspective of the Securities Market Reforms in India", SEBI Bulletin, April.
  • Basu, K., 2006; "A Fine Balance: Good Policy Entails Right Mix of State and Markets", The Times of India, August 15.
  • Becker, G. S., 1968; ‘Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach’, Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 76, No. 2, March-April.
  • Bekaert, G. and C.R. Harvey, 1998; "Capital Markets: An Engine for Economic Growth", The Brown Journal of World Affairs, Winter/Spring.
  • Bernstein, W.J., 2004;TheBirth of Plenty:Howthe Prosperity of the Modern World was Created, The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., New York, USA.
  • Bhalla, S., 1999; "Capital Markets: Why Is It India’s Most Unreformed Area?" in ‘India’s Financial markets and Institutions’, ed. L. C. Gupta, Society for Capital Market Research & Development, Delhi.
  • Bhattacharya, S. and U.R. Patel, 2005; "New Regulatory Institutions in India: White Knights or Trojan Horses?", in ‘Public Institutions in India: Performance and Design’, eds. D. Kapoor and P. Mehta, Oxford University Press, New Delhi.
  • Black, B.S., 2000; "The Core Institutions that Support Strong Securities Markets", Business Lawyer, Vol. 55,
  • Bombay High Court, 2004; In the matter of SEBI v. Cabot International Capital Corporation, Appeal No. 7 of 2001, 51 SCL 307 (Bom), Bombay High Court, Mumbai. http: //www.sebi.gov.in/cms/sebi_data/attachdocs/129293195 6500.pdf.
  • Bombay High Court, 2010; In the matter of Price Waterhouse & Co and Ors v. SEBI, W.P. Nos. 5249 & 5256 of 2010, 103 SCL 96 (Bom), Bombay High Court, Mumbai. http: //bombayhighcourt.nic.in/generatenewauth.php?auth=c GF0aD0uL2RhdGEvanVkZ2VtZW50cy8yMDEwLyZmbmFtZT1DV1AxNjY4MjEwLnBkZiZzbWZsYWc9Tg==.
  • Braun, D. and F. Gilardi, 2006; "Introduction" in Dietmar Braun and Fabrizio Gilardi (eds) Delegation in Contemporary Democracies, Psychology Press, London, U.K.
  • BSE Sensex Indices (Archives): www. Bseindia.com>indices> indexArchiveData, Several years.
  • BSE, NSEI, MSEI (Several years), capital Market Data, Bombay Stock Exchange, Mumbai, National Stock Exchange of India, Mumbai and Metropolitan Exchange of India, Mumbai respectively.
  • BSE & NSEI (Several years), Secondary Market Indicators, Bombay Stock Exchange, Mumbai and National Stock Exchange of India, Mumbai.
  • Chenggang, X. and K. Pistor, 2001; Law Enforcement under Incomplete Law: Theory and Evidence from Financial Market Regulation, Working Paper No. TE/02/332,
  • Suntory and Toyota Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK. http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/te/te442.pdf
  • City of London, 2009; Assessing the Effectiveness of Enforcement and Regulation. Bishopsgate, London, UK.
  • CMIE, (Several years) Securities Market Data, Centre for Monitoring of Indian Economy, Mumbai.
  • Coen, D. and M. Thateher, 2005; "The New Governance of Markets and Non-majoritarian Regulators", Governance, Vol. 18, No. 3.
  • Dal Bó, E., 2006; "Regulatory Capture: A Review", Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 22, No. 2.
  • Dalal, S., 2013; SEBI vs Investors, http://www.wikileaks-fo rum.com/india/68/sebi-vs-investors/17452/.
  • Datar, A., 2014; "Scrap Rules Before Laws", Economic Times, July 18.
  • Datta-Chaudhuri, M., 1990; "Market Failure and Government Failure", Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 4, No. 3.
  • Davies, H., 2004; "The Changing Face of Financial Regulation", SEBI Bulletin, April.
  • Davis, L.E. and D.C. North, 1971; Institutional Change and American Economic Growth, Cambridge University Press, New York.
  • Delhi High Court, 2002; In the matter of Yogesh Jain v. Union of India, 2004, 118 Comp Cas 758 (Del), Delhi High Court, Delhi.
  • Dhume, S., 2010; "Dragging India out of the Muck", Wall Street Journal, November 23. http://www.wsj.com/artic les/SB10001424052748704369304575631882431904958.
  • Doyle, C., 1996; "Why Markets need Referees?", Business Strategy Review, Vol. 7, No. 4.
  • Doyle, C., 1997; "Self Regulation and Statutory Regulation", Business Strategy Review, Vol. 8, No. 3.
  • Edelman, 2015; Trust Barometer, 2015 Annual Global Survey, Edelman, Bertland and Company, UK. http://www.edelman.com/insights/intellectual-property/2015-edelm an-trust-barometer/.
  • Farmer, R.E.A., 2011; "The Stock Market Crash of 2008 Caused the Great Recession: Theory and Evidence", Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Vol. 36, No. 5.
  • Ford, C. L., 2008; "New Governance, Compliance, and Principles-based Securities Regulation", American Business Law Journal, Spring, Vol. 45, No. 1.
  • Galbraith, J.K., 1954; The Great Crash 1929, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston, USA.
  • Glaeser, E.L., and A. Shleifer, 2003; "The Rise of the Regulatory State", Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XLI, June.
  • Glaeser, E.L. et. al., 2001; "Coase versus Coasians", Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 116, No. 3.
  • GOI, 2013; Companies Act, Ministry of Company Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi.
  • Goodhart, C., 1988; "The Costs of Regulation", in A. Seldon (ed.), Financial Regulation or Over-Regulation, IEA Readings No. 27, Institute of Economic Affairs, London.
  • Gorgens, T. et.al., 2003; How Does Public Regulation Affect Growth? Working Paper No. 2003-14, University of Aarhus, Denmark.
  • Gowland, D., 1990; The Regulation of Financial Markets in the 1990s, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK.
  • Gujarat High Court, 1996; In the matter of Karanavati Fincap Ltd. and Alka Spinners Ltd. V. SEBI 1996, 87 Comp Cas 186 (Guj), Gujarat High Court, Ahmedabad.
  • http://aera.gov.in/writereaddata/order/172.pdf.
  • http://cdnpmindia.nic.in/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Extra cts-of-the-Committee-of-the-Report-Vol.I-.pdf,
  • IMF, 2006; Accountability Arrangements for Financial Sector Regulators, Economic Issues, Vol. 39, International Monetary Fund, Washington, USA.
  • IOSCO, 2010; Objectives and Principles of Securities Regulation, International Organiation of Securities Commissions. Madrid, Spain, June.
  • Jaitley, A., 2014; Inaugural Address at the National Seminar onIndian FinancialCode at BombayStock Exchange Ltd., Nov. 29, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VucuZTF6fk.
  • Kaul, M. N. and S.L. Shakdher, 2009; Practice and Procedure of Parliament, 6th Edition, Lok Sabha Secretariat, New Delhi.
  • Kawai,M. O. and M. Pomerleano, 2010; Regulating Systemic Risk, ADB Institute Working Paper No. 189, January, Asian Development Bank Institute, Manila, Phillipines.
  • Kitch, E. W., 2001; "Proposals for Reform of Securities Regulation: An Overview", Virginia Journal of International Law, Vol. 41, No. 3.
  • Krueger, A.O., 1990; "Government Failures in Development", Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 4, No. 3.
  • La Porta, R., F. López-de-Silanes, A. Shleifer, and R. Vishny, 1998; "Law and Finance", Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 106, No. 6.
  • Lawrence, J., 1996; The Economics of Market Confidence: (Ac)Costing Securities Market Regulations, Working Paper, Centre for Law and Securities Regulation, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
  • Liewellyn, D.T., 1995; "Regulation of Retail Investment Services", Economic Affairs, Vol. 15, Spring.
  • Maggetti, M., 2010; "Legitimacy and Accountability of Independent Regulatory Agencies: A Critical Review", Living Reviews in Democracy.
  • Majone, G., 1999; "The Regulatory State and its Legitimacy Problems", West European Politics, Vol. 22, No. 1.
  • Majone, G., 2005; "The Delegation of Powers and the Fiduciary Principle", CONNEX Workshop, Paris.
  • Maskin, E. and J. Tirole, 2004; "The Politician and the Judge - Accountability in Government" American Economic Review, September, Vol. 94, No. 4.
  • Matthews, R. C. O., 1986; "The Economics of Institutions and the Sources of Economic Growth", The Economic Journal, Vol. 96, No. 4.
  • Matthews, R. C. O., 1986; "The Economics of Institutions and the Sources of Economic Growth", The Economic Journal, Vol. 96, No. 4.
  • MCA, 2013; Report of the Committee for Reforming the Regulatory Environment for Doing Business in India, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi.
  • MCA, 2014; Draft Order of Amalgamation of NSEL with FTIL, October 21. http://www.mca.gov.in/Ministry/pdf/Draft_Order_of_M erger.pdf.
  • MOF, 2005; Report of the Expert Group on Protection of Interests of Small Investors and New Avenues for Safe Investment of their Savings, January, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi.
  • MOF, 2007; Report of the High Powered Expert Committee on Making Mumbai an International Financial Centre, February 10, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi.
  • MOF, 2009; Financial Well-Being - Report of the Committee on Investor Awareness and Protection, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi.
  • MOF, 2010; Report of the Working Group on Foreign Investment, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi, July 30.
  • MOF, 2013a; Report of the Financial Sector Legislative Reforms Commission, Volume I: Analysis and Recommendations; & Volume II: Indian Financial Code, Ministry of Finance. Government of India, New Delhi.
  • MOF, 2013b; Report of the Committee to Review the FCCBs and Ordinary Shares (Through Depository Receipt Mechanism) Scheme, 1993, November 26, Ministry of Finance. Government of India, New Delhi.
  • MOF, 2014a; Management information system for implementation of Handbook on adoption of governance enhancing and non-legislative elements of the draft Indian Financial Code. Ministry of Finance. Government of India, New Delhi.
  • Nair, C.K.G., 2011; Regulatory Reforms in Indian Commodity Futures Market, Ph.D. Thesis submitted to the Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
  • Nair, C.K.G. and M.S. Sahoo, 2007a; "An Index to Capture Market Health", The Economic Times, May 18.
  • Nair, C.K.G. and M.S. Sahoo, 2008a; "Stock Exchanges on a Path of Self-Extinction", The Economic Times, January 28.
  • Nair, C.K.G. and M.S. Sahoo, 2008b; "Financial WMDs and the Regulators", The Economic Times, November 7.
  • Nelson, M. W., 2003; "Behavioral Evidence on the Effects of Principles- and Rules-based Standards", Accounting Horizon, March, Vol. 17. No. 1.
  • Niemeyer, J., 2001; An Economic Analysis of Securities Market Regulation and Supervision: Where to Go after the Lamfalussy Report?, Working Paper No. 482, Stockholm School of Economics.
  • North, D., 1990; Institutions, Institutional Change, and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
  • North, D., 1991; "Institutions", Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 5, No. 1.
  • North, D., 1994; "Economic Performance through Time", American Economic Review, Vol. 84, No. 3, June.
  • North, D.C. and Robert, T., 1973; The Rise of the Western World: A New Economic History, Cambridge University Press.
  • NSEIL, 2014; Indian Securities Market - A Review, Vol. XVII, National Stock Exchange of India Limited, Mumbai.
  • OECD, 1995; Recommendations of the Council of the OECD on improving the quality of Government Regulation, The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, France.
  • OECD, 2002; Regulatory Policies in OECD Countries: From Interventionism to Regulatory Governance, The Organisation fo rEconomic Cooperation and Development, Paris, France.
  • OECD, 2008; Introductory Handbook for Undertaking Regulatory Impact Analysis, The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, France.
  • OECD, 2012; Recommendation of the Council of the OECD on Regulatory Policy and Governance, The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, France.
  • Parker, D. and C. Kirkpatrick, 2012; Measuring Regulatory Performance, OECD Expert Paper, No. 3, The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, France.
  • Parliamentary Standing Committee onLaw and Justice, 2014; Seventy Third Report - The Repealing and AmendingBill, Rajya Sabha, New Delhi.
  • Patnaik, I. and A. Shah, 2014; Reforming India’s Financial System, January 29, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, USA.
  • Pistor, K. and X. Chenggang, 2003; "Incomplete Law", International Law and Politics, Vol. 35, No. 4.
  • Planning Commission, 2008a;AHundred Small Steps, Report of the Committeeon Financial Sector Reforms, September 12, Planning Commission, Government of India, New Delhi
  • Planning Commission, 2008b; Approach to Regulation of Infrastructure: Issues and Options, Consultation Paper, http://planningcommission.nic.in/reports/genrep/infra_re glawl.pdf.
  • Planning Commission, 2013; Draft Regulatory Reforms Bill, http://planningcommission.gov.in/reports/genrep/reg_bil l2711.pdf.
  • PMO, 2014; Report of the Committee to identify the Central Acts which are not relevant or no longer needed or require repeal/re-enactment in the present socio-economic context, Prime Minister’s Office, Government of India, New Delhi.
  • Posner, R. A., 1974; Theories of EconomicRegulation,NBER Working Paper No. 41, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.
  • Prat, R. and A. Berg, 2014; Governance of Securities Regulators - A Framework, Policy Research Working Paper Series WPS 6800, The World Bank, Washington.
  • Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2004; in the matter of P. G. F. Ltd. vs. Union of India, 2004 55 SCL 165 Punj Har, Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh.
  • Quintyn, M. and M.W. Taylor, 2004; Should Financial Sector Regulators Be Independent?, IMF Economic Issues No. 32, International Monetary Fund, Washington, USA.
  • Rajasthan High Court, 2010; In the matter of 21st Century Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India and others (D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4333/2010) and 20 other related petitions, Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur.
  • Ramkrishna, C. and M.S. Sahoo, 2010; "Equity Markets" in Capital Markets in India, eds. Rajesh Chakrabarti and Sankar De, Sage Publications and the Indian School of Business, Hyderabad.
  • Raval, D., 2011; Improving the Legal Process in Enforcement at SEBI, IGIDR Working Paper No. 8. Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai.
  • RBI, (Several years), Securities Market Data, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai.
  • RBI, (Several years), Several Statistical Publications, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai.
  • Rodrik, D., A. Subramanian, and T. Francesco, 2004; "Institutions Rule: The Primacy of Institutions over Geography
  • and Integration in Economic Development", Journal of Economic Growth, Vol. 9, No. 2.
  • Rodrik, D. and A. Subramanian, 2003; "The Primacy of Institutions (and what this does and does not mean)", Finance & Development, June.
  • Rodrik, D. and A. Subramanian, 2005; ‘From Hindu Growth to Productivity Surge: The Mystery of the Indian Growth Transition’, IMF Staff Papers, Vol. 52, No. 2.
  • Sabarinathan, G., 2010; "SEBI’s Regulation of the Indian Securities Market: A Critical Review of the Major Developments", Vikalpa, Vol. 35, No. 4, October-December.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 1997; "Securities Market Reforms in a Developing Country", Chartered Secretary, November.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2004; "Broking Industry - 10 Years Hence", SEBI Bulletin, March.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2005a; "Disclosure Based Regulation: Sustainability Examined", Chartered Financial Analyst, January.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2005b; "A Historical Perspective of Securities Laws", NSE NEWS, February.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2005c; "An Overview of Securities Markets in India", SEBI Bulletin, March.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2012a; "Managing Conflict of Interest (In Stock Exchanges)", The Economic Times, April 21.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2012b; "Enforcement Actions under Securities Laws", Chartered Secretary, October.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2013a; "Fraudulent Financiers, Beware", Hindu Business Line, August 6.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2013b; A dynamic company law", Financial Express, September 10.
  • Sahoo, M. S., 2016; Economics of Regulations in Indian Securities Markets, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Department of Economics. Faculty of Arts, University of Miumbai, Mumbai.
  • Sahoo, M. S. and A. Kumar, 2005; "Consent Settlement: Facts and Myths", Prime Directory, 2011.
  • Sahoo, M. S. and C.K.G. Nair, 2008; "Market Swings and Equity Wealth Effect", The Economic Times, March 20.
  • Sahoo, M. S. and P.K. Rath, 2004; "Who Moved My Cheese (The Story of Stock Exchanges), Chartered Secretary November.
  • Sahoo, M. S. and R. Venkateswaran, 2005; "Population of Investors in Securities", Chartered Secretary, August.
  • SAT, 2003a; In the matter of Kinglet Finlease & Securities Ltd. Vs. SEBI (Appeal No. 88/2002), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2003b; In the matter of Kishore Rajram Chhabria vs. SEBI (Appeal No. 13 of 2002), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2003c; In the matter of Manu Finlease vs. SEBI (Appeal No.15/2003), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2008a; In the matter of Mathew Easo vs. AO, SEBI (Appeal No. 137/2006), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2008b; In the matter of Libord Finance Limited vs. SEBI (Appeal No. 37/2008), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2010a; In the matter of Pyramid Saimira Theatre Ltd. vs. SEBI (Appeal No. 242/2009), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2012a; In the matter of Subhkam Securities Private Limited Vs. SEBI (Appeal No.73/2012), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2012b; In the matter of Bankim J. Shah vs. SEBI (Appeal No.164 of 2012), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2012c; In the matter between Mohit International and another vs. SEBI (Appeal No. 150/2012), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SAT, 2012d; In the matter of Rikhav Securities vs. SEBI (Appeal No. 168/ 2012), Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai.
  • SEBI, (Several years), Several Statistical Publications, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai.
  • SEBI, 2000, 2002, 2013; How Household Save and Invest: Evidence from SEBI - NCAER, Household Surveys of Indian Investors, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai.
  • SEBI, 2013a; Banyan Tree to e-trading, Securities Exchange Board of India, Mumbai.
  • SEBI, 2014; Handbook of Statistics on Indian Securities Market 2013, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai.
  • SEBI, 2015; (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai.
  • SEBI, 2015a; How Household Save and Invest: Evidence from SEBI - Nielsen Household Survey of Indian Investors, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai.
  • SEBI, 2020; Turnover on Indian Stock Exchanges, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai.
  • SEBI, Annual Reports for various years, Securities and Exchange Board of India, Mumbai.
  • Shah, A., 1999; "Institutional Change in India’s Capital Markets", Economic and Political Weekly, 16-29 January, Vol. 34 No. 3-4.
  • Shah, A., 2013; "SEBI at 25", The Economic Times, May 24.
  • Sidgwik, H., 1901; Principles of Political Economy, Macmillan Company, New York.
  • Smith, A., 1776; An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, W. Strahan and T. Cadell, London.
  • Srinivasan, V., 2014; Interview, The Economic Times, July 7. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-07-0 7/news/51133837_1_esi-land-acquisition-act-land-loser s.
  • Sriraman, S. and S. Roy, 2009; Financing Transport Infrastructure and Services in India, Development Research Group Study No. 28, Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai.
  • Stigler, G.J., 1971; "The Theory of Economic Regulation", Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, Vol. 2, No. 1.
  • Subramanian,A., 2007; "The Evolution of Institutions in India and its Relationship with Economic Growth", Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Vol. 23, No. 2.
  • Supreme Court, 2013c; Appeal (Civil) No. 6572 of 2004 in the matter of P. G. F. Ltd and Ors v. UoI and anr, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http://www.sebi.gov.in/cms /sebi_data/attachdocs/1363668111752.pdf.
  • Supreme Court, 1972; In the matter of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. Workmen of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., AIR 1972 S.C. 1917, The Supreme Court, New Delhi.
  • Supreme Court, 1974 In the matter of Gwalior Rayon Mills Mfg. (Wing) Co. Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax&Ors, AIR 1974 SC 1660, The Supreme Court, New Delhi.
  • Supreme Court, 1987; In the matter of Union of India and Anr. V. Cynamide India Ltd. and Anr, AIR 1987 SC 1802, The Supreme Court, New Delhi.
  • Supreme Court, 1995; In the matter of U.P. Sales Tax Service Association v. Taxation Bar Association, Agra & others (1996 AIR 98), The Supreme Court, New Delhi.
  • Supreme Court, 2001; In the matter of B.S.E. Brokers’ Forum Bombay v. Securities and Exchange Board of India, The Supreme Court 48, New Delhi.
  • Supreme Court, 2003; In the matter of St. Johns Teachers Training Institute v. Regional Director, National Council for Teacher Education & Anr., http://judis.nic.in/supre mecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=18855, The Supreme Court, New Delhi.
  • Supreme Court, 2004; Appeal (Civil) 3183 of 2003 in the matter of Clariant International & Anr. v. SEBI, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename= 26360.
  • Supreme Court, 2006; Appeal (Civil) 9523-9524 of 2003 in the matter of SEBI v. Shriram MutualFund, The Supreme Court, New Delhi.
  • Supreme Court, 2008; In the matter of Union of India v. Dharmendra Textiles Processors and others, (2008) 13 SCC 369, The Supreme Court, New Delhi.
  • Supreme Court, 2009; Appeal (Civil) No. 3696 of 2005 in the matter of SEBI vs. Saikala Associates Ltd., The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http://indiankanoon.org/doc/10649/.
  • Supreme Court, 2010a; Appeal (Civil) 7148 of 2009 in the matter of Daiichi Sankyo Company Limited v. Jayaram Chigurupati & Ors, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. htt p://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=364 58.
  • Supreme Court, 2010b; Appeal (Civil) 3067 of 2004 in the matter of Union of India Vs. R. Gandhi, and Appeal (Civil) 3717 of 2005 in the matter of Madras Bar Association Vs. Union of India, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http: //judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=36365 .
  • Supreme Court, 2011; Appeal (Criminal) 2178 of 2011 in the matter of Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, (2011 ALL SCR 2930), The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http://judis.nic.in/supr emecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=38869,
  • Supreme Court, 2012b; Appeal (Civil) 9813 of 2011 in the matter of Sahara India Real Estate Corporation Limited and Ors. v. SEBI, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. htt p://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=395 15.
  • Supreme Court, 2013a; Appeal (Civil) Nos. 4112-4113 of 2013 in the matter of N. Narayanan v. Adjudicating Officer, SEBI, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http://w ww.sebi.gov.in/cms/sebi_data/attachdocs/14135219828 29.pdf,
  • Supreme Court, 2013b; Appeal (Civil) No. 5253 of 2010 in the matter of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. v. Telecom Regulatory Authority of India and Ors, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/im gs1.aspx?filename=41056.
  • Supreme Court, 2014a; WP (Criminal) No. 57 of 2014 in the matter of Subrata Roy Sahara v. UoI and others, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http://www.sebi.gov.in/cms /sebi_data/attachdocs/1399369242118.pdf.
  • Supreme Court, 2014b; Transferred Case (Civil) 150 of 2006 in the matter of Madras Bar Association vs. Union of India and another, The Supreme Court, New Delhi. http://ju dis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgs1.aspx?filename=41962
  • Szapiro, M., 2005; "The Framework for European Regulatory Agencies: A Balance between Accountability and Autonomy", 3rd ECPR 2005 Conference ,Budapest, 8-11 September.
  • The Economic Times, 2013; "Sebi at 25: Success, failures and challenges ahead" (Editorial), May 24.
  • The Times of India, 2015a; "Sebi men examined for suspected weakening of case against bank promoters", (TNN News Report), January 30.
  • The Times of India, 2015b; "Amidst Fear of 3 ‘C’s slowing down decision-making", (TNN & Agencies), February 7.
  • The World Bank, 2014; Doing Business 2015 - Going Beyond Efficiency, 12th Edition, October 29, The World Bank, Washington, USA.
  • U.K. Govt., 2006; Executive Agencies: A Guide for Departments. Cabinet Office, Her Majesty’s Government, U.K.
  • U.K. Govt., 2018; Executive Agencies: A Guide for Departments, Cabinet Office, Her Majesty’s Government, U.K.
  • Vogel, S. K., 1996; Freer Markets, More Rules: Regulatory Reform in Advanced Industrial Countries, Ithaca and London, Cornell University Press.
  • Walsh, J.H., 2008; "Institution-Based Financial Regulation: A Third Paradigm", Harvard International Law Journal, Summer, Vol. 49, No. 2.
  • Westrup, J., 2007; Regulatory Governance, WP/36/2007, UCD Geary Institute Discussion Paper Series, UCD Institute for Public Policy, University of Dublin, Dublin.
  • Williamson, O.E., 1996; The Mechanisms of Governance, Oxford University Press, New York.
  • Williamson, O.E., 2000; "The New Institutional Economics: Taking Stock, Looking Ahead", Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. XXXVII, September.
  • Wolf, C., 1978; ATheory of Non-Market Failure: Framework for Implementation Analysis, The Rand Corporation, Washington, USA.
  • World Bank, 2014; Doing Business 2015 - Going Beyond Efficiency, 12th Edition, October 29, World Bank, Washington DC, USA.
  • Wright, D., 2014; "Regulating the Market - India has a good system", Interview, ANMI Journal, April, Association of National Exchanges of Members of India, Mumbai. htt ps://www.iosco.org/library/articles/201404-Regulating-t he-market-India-has-a-good-system.pdf.
  • ADDITIONAL READING MATERIAL
  • GOI, 2015; Report of the Bankruptcy Law Reforms Committee, Volume I: Rationale and Design, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi, November.
  • Hupkes, E. et. al., 2006; Accountability Arrangements for Financial Sector Regulations, Economic Issues, Vol. 39, International Monetary Fund, Washington D.C.
  • OECD, 2014; The Governance of Regulators, OECD Best Practice Principles for Regulatory Policy, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264209015-en
  • PRS, 2019; Report Summary- Report of the Competition Law Review Committee, PRS Legislative Research, Institute for Policy Research Studies, New Delhi, September.
  • Report of the High-Level Committee on Competition Policy andLaw (Chairperson: S.V.S. Raghavan), Government of India, May 2000.
  • World Bank, 2002; Building Institutions for Markets, World Development Report, World Bank, Washington D.C.

Abstract Views: 5

PDF Views: 1




  • Reforming the Regulatory State

Abstract Views: 5  |  PDF Views: 1

Authors

M. S. Sahoo
Chairperson, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India, New Delhi, India

Abstract


The rise of regulators to share governance with Government is now a hard reality and governance through regulators probably constitutes the most important governance reforms in the last century. A regulator sits in the middle of a hierarchy of agencies: Government and economic agents. It generally does not share the ‘social’ obligations of Government; nor is it subject to the pressures of ‘interest’ groups. It provides the same level playing field to all kinds of participants without fear or favour. It builds the expertise matching the complexities of the task and evolves processes to enforce authority rapidly and proactively. It operates at arm’s length from government, insulated from daily political pressures and embedding their decisions in technical expertise. But there are significant concerns due to the fusion of legislative, executive, and judicial powers in one entity; Governments continue to remain accountable for the governance carried out through the regulator, thereby posing an example of the classical principal-agent problem. India has now more than two decades of experience with governance through regulators, It has been increasingly felt that a comprehensive review of the experience so far with a view to learn to improve the spacing and design of the regulators within the constitutional schema to make them more effective is the need of the hour. This paper undertakes this review on the basis of which it attempts to propose a more effective regulatory framework.

Keywords


No Keywords.

References