论坛风格切换切换到宽版
  • 91阅读
  • 0回复

The Reserve Bank of India: Supreme Court Shouldn’t Interfere With the Decision on Cryptocurrency [复制链接]

上一主题 下一主题
 

分享到微信朋友圈
打开微信,点击底部的“发现”,
使用“扫一扫”即可将网页分享至朋友圈。
如果您现在使用手机,请将这个2维码存入相册,再打开微信,扫一扫,点击相册。

The Reserve Bank of India submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court of India in response to a petition against its crypto banking ban. According to reports, the Central Bank argued that it was acting within its own powers, and that no petitioner had reasonable grounds for the Supreme Court to intervene.


Last week, the Supreme Court of India planned to deal with all complaints from the Reserve Bank of India about the ban on crypto banking. However, the case was postponed from the date of the initial hearing of September 11th for the second week. According to industry sources, the court currently plans to deal with the case on September 25.


According to a report on September 21 of the Inc42 network, in response to a petition from the Indian Internet and Mobile Communications Association (IAMAI), the Bank of India submitted an affidavit to the Supreme Court on September 8. Inc42 has a petition filed by IAMAI on September 8, 2018 and a response from RBI on September 8, 2018.


The central bank stated in its affidavit that the IAMAI petition and other petitions challenging the ban, whether legal or in fact, are unmaintainable and therefore likely to be rejected.


Since the Bank of India issued a notice on April 6th prohibiting banks from providing services to encryption companies, there have been many petitions against the ban. They accused the central bank of violating Articles 19(1)(g) and 14 of the Indian Constitution, which would cause the affected companies to close. However, the Reserve Bank of India elaborated on this in its affidavit: “The refusal notice and the refusal statement neither violate the equal rights guaranteed by article 14 nor violate the trade and commercial rights guaranteed by article 19 of the Constitution. Applicants must not attempt to exercise the special jurisdiction of the High Court to exercise the rights they do not have. ”


The Reserve Bank of India responded further by stating that there is no statutory right, let alone the right to be infringed, that applicants can open and maintain bank accounts online for virtual currency transactions, investments or transactions. In addition, the central bank also claimed that IAMAI and others did not have any reasonable or justified reason to interfere with the court.


The country’s central bank argued that its April 6 announcement was consistent with the previous three statements on cryptocurrencies, one in 2013 and the other in 2017.


The Bank of India said the notice was a necessary step, saying that cryptocurrencies are related to a variety of risks, such as lack of customer protection, high volatility, wallet and forex exchanges are vulnerable to cyber attacks, money laundering and other news media, and litecoin, dash coinand nem coin were involved.


Unlike a currency that is defined as a medium of exchange, a means of value storage, and a unit of accountkeeping, the central bank asserts that cryptocurrencies alike tether coin do not meet the above criteria at all because of the volatility of cryptocurrencies, lack of intrinsic value, and low adoption rates. The Bank of India emphasized that their value comes only from the parties that are willing to pay a specific amount for them.
评价一下你浏览此帖子的感受

献花
快速回复
如果您在写长篇帖子又不马上发表,建议存为草稿
 
安全校验: 答案:168 登录会员无需填写, 游客显示3组IP
上一个 下一个