What can SEBI learn from the case of Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet regarding conflict of interests?

 

Adani Group: A few days ago, Hindenburg Research claimed that SEBI chief Madhubi Puri Buch has business relations with the Adani Group. After this, it was said that Buch was involved in the investigation of the allegations made against the Adani Group in the past days, whereas she should have distanced herself from this investigation.

Madhabi Puri Buch: Recently, SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch and her husband Dhaval Buch were accused by Hindenburg of having business relations with the Adani Group. Along with this, it was also alleged that they did not allow the allegations of irregularities and fraud against the Adani Group to be investigated properly. However, on these allegations, Adani Group and Madhubi Puri Buch have issued a statement calling such allegations baseless. American shortseller firm Hindenburg claimed that Madhubi Puri Buch and her husband used to invest money abroad in the offshore fund of the Adani Group.

There is a possibility of impact on the investigation in the Adani case

In this case, it is being said that Madhubi Puri Buch's business relationship with the Adani Group is likely to affect the investigation conducted in the past few days. The allegations against Madhubi Puri Buch are quite different from the case of Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. But SEBI needs to learn a lot from this. Pinochet was accused of ill-treating people. But there is definitely some similarity between the case of Pinochet and the SEBI chief. The rules that were made in 1998 from the Pinochet extradition case are related to the crisis of SEBI today.

The decision was changed in the House of Lords of Britain.

It was the year 1998, when Pinochet was arrested in Britain on the orders of Spanish judge Baltasar Garson. The matter reached the House of Lords of Britain. But the decision was changed there. The reason for changing this decision was that it came to light that one of the judges associated with the case, Lord Hoffman, was associated with Amnesty International, an organization working for human rights violations. Later it was also known that Lord Hoffman's wife was also associated with Amnesty International and he himself was the director and chairman of the organization.

After this, all the four judges of Britain's House of Lords said that Hoffman cannot be involved in this case. This seemed to indicate that his interest was also involved in this case. This was the reason why the order to re-hear

the case was given. This incident shows that if a judge feels that he cannot be impartial in a case, even if he is actually impartial, then he should not give a verdict in that case.

Buch did not recuse himself from Adani case!

The above rule means that no person can decide his own case. Madhubi Puri Buch has been accused of conflict of interest. But she has not recused herself from the Adani case. This makes people think that SEBI is not working properly. This situation is similar to the Pinochet case, where a judge was removed because he seemed to have a conflict of interest in the case.