SEBI's Defiance Continues in Denying Information under RTI on Dates of Assets Declaration by Madhabi Puri Buch and Her Family
Moneylife Digital Team 02 January 2025
Market regulator Securities & Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has once again refused to share information under the Right to Information (RTI) Act on the dates of declaration of financial assets and equities held by SEBI chairperson Madhabi Puri Buch and her family members. After contradicting its own press release, SEBI now says that this information is 'confidential' and 'personal' and has no relationship to public activity!
 
Delhi-based activist commodore (Cmde) Lokesh Batra (retd) has been filing the RTI applications seeking information on the appointment of Ms Buch and dates when the SEBI chairperson declared details of financial assets and equities held by her and her family members to the government. Cmde Batra has been repeatedly seeking information from SEBI and the FinMin about the dates of the declaration of assets (and not the details of assets) by Ms Buch and her family.
 
In the latest reply, Santosh Kumar Sharma, central public information officer (CPIO) of SEBI says, "The information sought is confidential personal information available to SEBI in a fiduciary capacity. Therefore, the said information is exempt under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act, 2005. Further, the information sought is personal information the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest and may cause an unwarranted invasion into privacy of the individual. Hence, the same is exempt under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, 2005."
 
For Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act to apply, there must be a fiduciary relationship and the holder of information must hold the information in his fiduciary capacity. However, in most cases, the information held by a regulator cannot be said to be information held in a fiduciary capacity, as mentioned under Section 8(1)(e) of the RTI Act. 
 
If information is at all available with a regulatory agency, such as SEBI, in a fiduciary relationship, there is a reason to withhold its disclosure. However, where information is required by mandate of law to be provided to an authority, it cannot be said that such information is being provided in a fiduciary relationship.
 
Further, whatever information SEBI has, it is because the market regulator has the power to seek the information under the law, rules and proceedings and not because the information provider (Ms Buch, in this case) provided the information for safekeeping.
 
"How do we trust SEBI's response when it keeps changing grounds for denying information?" Cmde Batra says. "SEBI also questions the public interest in seeking information from SEBI. It is to be understood that the citizens have a large public interest in monitoring the functioning of the regulatory body, namely SEBI by virtue of its role. The functioning of SEBI efficiently or otherwise has a direct or indirect impact on taxpayers' money. Hence, citizens have a very large public interest."
 
As reported by Moneylife, both SEBI and FinMin are found to be using different excuses in denying information about the appointment of Ms Buch and the declaration of assets by the SEBI chairperson and her family. 
 
The RTI activist filed applications on the same subject with SEBI and the FinMin. At first, SEBI told Cmde Batra that it does not have any information readily available on its chairperson's appointment, her application for the post, declaration of assets and cases where she had recused herself due to conflicts of interest.
 
Going one step ahead by sharing dates related to the appointment of Ms Buch as chairperson of SEBI, the FinMin CPIO denied sharing information on dates when Ms Buch and her family declared their financial assets. 
 
As reported by Moneylife in September 2024, except for sharing the dates of appointment of Ms Buch, SEBI did not provide any information on the appointment, her application for the post, declaration of assets and cases where she had recused herself due to conflicts of interest. In fact, by denying the information, SEBI contradicted its statement issued on 11 August 2022.
 
In that statement, SEBI stated, "...it is emphasised that SEBI has adequate internal mechanisms for addressing issues relating to conflict of interest, which include disclosure framework and provision for recusal. It is noted that relevant disclosures required in terms of holdings of securities and their transfers have been made by the chairperson from time to time. (The) chairperson has also recused herself in matters involving potential conflicts of interest." (Read: SEBI Contradicts Own Release, Denies Information on Madhabi Puri Buch's Appointment, Asset Declaration and Recusal)
 
In October last year, while upholding a reply given by the CPIO of the department of economic affairs (DEA) under the FinMin, the first appellate authority (FAA) discarded a first appeal filed under the RTI Act. The RTI and first appeal filed by Cmde Batra was related to the appointment and financial asset declaration by Ms Buch, the chairperson of SEBI. 
 
While sharing dates related to the appointment of Ms Buch as SEBI chief, the CPIO of the FinMin refused to share information on the dates when Ms Buch and her family declared their financial assets. Instead of sharing dates, Jasvinder Singh, undersecretary to the government of India and CPIO stated, "The disclosures to be made by the members and chairman of the board are governed by the code of conflict of interests for members of board, which may be accessed at https://www.sebi.gov.in/commondata/conf.pdf." 
 
In his first appeal, Cmde Batra stated that "The CPIO did not provide information on points 2(d) and 2(e) specifically about date/ dates. Please note that each of the above two queries seeks 'dates only'. The CPIO instead provided a link to 'Code on Conflict of Interests for Members of Board'."
 
The FAA, however, upheld that the information (!) provided by the CPIO is correct and based on facts. 
 
Cmde Batra says, "Did the current chairperson of the SEBI, Ms Buch, make a declaration(s) to the government of India of complete details of 'financial assets and equities' held by her (Ms Buch) and her concerned family members? Going by the RTI and first appeal responses from the FinMin, the answer is 'NO'." (Read: SEBI Chief's Asset Declaration: When FinMin's FAA Also Can't Understand Difference between a Date and Weblink!)  
 
You may also want to read…
 
 
 
 
 
 
Comments
Shocker: While Accused Gets All Information under RTI, EOW’s Investigating Officer Is Denied the Same!
Vinita Deshmukh, 03 January 2025
Young Indian Police Service (IPS) officer, Bhagyashree Navtake, who undertook a complex series of fraud investigations between 2020-2022, involving the Jalgaon-based Bhaichand Hirachand Raisoni Multi State Cooperative Credit Society...
A Govt Officer Lives in Public Glare and Must Be Open to Public Scrutiny: Madras High Court
Vinita Deshmukh, 27 December 2024
Information that does not harm the public servant’s career, such as date of joining, promotion details and nature of work, can be disclosed and if any information is to be denied or disclosed, proper reasons for such a decision must...
Registrar of Cooperative Societies Must Provide Information to Society Members under the RTI Act, Orders Kerala HC
Vinita Deshmukh, 13 December 2024
In a reformist kind of judgement, the Kerala High Court has ruled that if documents held by a cooperative society are accessible to the registrar of cooperative societies and are not exempt from disclosure under Section 8 of the Right...
Array
Free Helpline
Legal Credit
Feedback