Insider Trading Actions Constitute Causal Relationship

Along with the improvement of socialist market economic order, stock and futures trading have gradually been accepted by the general public, and become one of the main forms of investment. China’s securities market is still in its infancy stage, the maintenance of market order, laws and regulations are inadequate in terms of protection, leading to repeated illegal and criminal acts of the securities market, trading in the securities market order also violates the lawful rights and interests of the participants on investment, has seriously hindered the healthy development of the securities market.Insider trading and divulging inside information was just one of many serious crimes against order of the securities market, has long been considered a tumor on the securities and futures market and its harmfulness do not repeat them, countries and regions in the world have introduced related laws and regulations to regulate. However, the characteristics of insider secrets, their behaviour presents diverse development, only the insider to thoroughly analyze and understand the elements of criminal acts to accurately and effectively regulated.Generally said that the insider should include insider dealing, insider information, the trading behavior and the causal relationship between the four elements. In our country the first three laws have been more comprehensive and detailed provisions, constitutes insider trading requires what type of causal relationship is still there. Causality here means insider trading actions constitute elements of causality, namely, acts performed by a person between transactions and their insider information at the disposal of the objective existence of certain substantive relationship, is a precondition for identified insider behaviors. By analyzing the legal provisions on insider trading in China, combined with the theory of criminal law, United States and the EU on relevant theories of insider trading cases, regulations, directives, and, to study the causal elements of insider to prove insider trading activities in a "use" insider information as necessary, and building a suitable standard of proof envisaged. This thesis is divided into six chapters.First chapter discusses insider causal elements in theory a number of controversial standards, including "use" standard, "know" standards, "modified use" standard and the "modified know" standard. "use" standard refers to the insider trading act must be based on use of insider information is required with inside information is the distinction between securities insider dealing crime and non-crime one of the criteria, therefore, to identify whether the basis or take advantage of insider information is a prerequisite to judgment that the Act could constitute insider trading. "know" standards refer to any personnel with inside information or illegally obtain inside information associated with that information before the public securities and futures transactions, in compliance with the requisites of crime of insider trading, does not require the actual use of insider information, that is, to better know the insider information as necessary. "Modified use" and "modified know" standards are based on "use" and "know" standards, through introduced presumption rules and provides defence case to amendment proved standard, to better of solution practice in the of problem, and essentially "modified use" and "modified know" are no beyond "use" and "know" of category, so still just on "use" and "know" standards for discussion.Chapter II focuses on discussion and research in administrative, economic legislation, regulations and judicial definition of insider causal elements. By comparing the United States, the European Union’s provisions and the provisions of the securities laws and relevant administrative regulations to prove insider trading activities in a "use" insider information as necessary. United States laws for the constitutive elements of securities insider trading provisions do not have a unified standard, but can be found in the Securities Exchange Act of "use" insider information on the related words. In the European Community, in theory, insider trading if you need "use" insider information, dispute, but this attitude is clear, comprehensive analysis of legislative history of insider trading, you can see that both the EU itself and in the Member States, broadly consistent with requirements of insider trading by "use" insider information as necessary. China’s securities law on insider trading provisions of the Act should be considered as a whole, complementary interaction between the law, the 73 rd article "use" element to the insider trading provisions of the Act are limited; also clearly sets out the administrative regulations and normative documents "use" insider information is an essential element of insider behavior.Chapter III focuses on insider trading and research elements of causation in criminal legislation, regulations and judicial definition. United States is a case-law country,which needs to be implemented by judges ruling on the case law-making to improve relevant legal concepts.United States causality on insider trading charges by the Court finds that there are two different opinions, namely "use" and the "know" standards. EU directive on the regulation of insider trading, the market abuse directive provides for "insider information" are the constituent elements of the offence of insider trading. Article 180 of China Criminal Law did not explicitly propose "insider information" elements, but by spirit of rule of law, legal structure, as well as before and after thorough analysis of the content of articles of law can still be deemed "use" is the necessity. 2012 judicial interpretation of crime of insider trading also reflected it.The fourth chapter has demonstrated "use" insider information as a necessary premise, in the light of United States and European Union standards, suitable for our practice standards of proof envisaged. United States current "modified use " and the "modified know" standards, are able to accurately and effectively applies must use United States a sound regulatory system. European countries should be identified in the EU "insider information" as elements of the premise to develop in line with its own securities, futures trading market, consistent standard. China should adopt a "presumption of use rules" determine whether Insider "use" insider information, and build a sound proof system.