Xinhua news agency, December 27th, SFC 27 released information disclosure Illegal activities administrative responsibility The rules of identification (Draft for Soliciting Comments) clearly stipulate the types, definitions, responsibility cognizance and imputation principles of illegal acts of information disclosure, so as to ensure the authenticity and accuracy of information disclosure, and protect the legitimate rights and interests of investors.

The draft will divide the illegal information disclosure into four categories: undisclosed information, false record, misleading statement and major omission.

For the duty of information disclosure obligor's information disclosure, it is required to combine the two aspects of subjective and objective examination. The judgment of serious violations of objective offenses includes the direct consequences of illegal activities, including the impact and proportion of assets, liabilities, income, profits, profits and losses; indirect results, including the issue of issuing, reorganization of assets, exemption from takeover offer, changes in qualification of listing, etc., whether there are recidivism plots, individual effects and social general effects. The subjective aspect should be considered comprehensively according to whether it is collusion, intentional or negligence, whether to make remedies, whether to report voluntarily and cooperate with the investigation.

The draft is adopted by the directors, supervisors and senior managers to take the principle of presumption of fault. In respect of the difference of responsibilities of different responsible persons, the draft solicitation requests to distinguish the responsibility of the responsible persons from the four aspects of the degree and attitude of the responsible persons in the process of information disclosure, the degree and attitude of the illegal acts, their duties, specific duties and fulfillment, and professional background.

According to reports, from 2007 to date, the SFC has made 70 decisions on penalties for information disclosure, punishing nearly 600 persons responsible for information disclosure offenses, and taking 54 measures against illegal persons responsible for information disclosure, transferring 7 suspected cases of information disclosure to judicial organs.