Calls for fundamental reform of the financial supervisory system grow louder. Fundamentally, this stems from the fact that under the current system, financial policy and supervisory functions are performed by the same institution, which often results ...
Calls for fundamental reform of the financial supervisory system grow louder. Fundamentally, this stems from the fact that under the current system, financial policy and supervisory functions are performed by the same institution, which often results in financial supervision being treated as a lower priority. Additionally, the separation of supervisory policy-making and supervisory enforcement functions makes it difficult to carry out timely and effective supervision.
This paper seeks to examine reform measures for the financial supervisory system in respect of financial consumer protection. To achieve this, financial policy and financial supervision functions should first be separated, and there is a strong need to integrate the policy-making and enforcement functions within the financial supervisory body itself.
Meanwhile, to ensure effective financial consumer protection, a twin peaks model may be more advantageous than an integrated supervisory system. This is because a twin peaks model offers benefits in areas such as the allocation of regulatory resources, the elimination of regulatory blind spots, responsiveness to changes in the financial environment, and the enhancement of expertise in the exercise of supervisory authority. Also it is more advantageous in termso of conflicts of interest managemnet.
However, even under a twin peaks model, it is essential to build and operate a robust system for information sharing and close coordination between the prudential and conduct supervisors. In addition, efforts should be made to establish an independent dispute resolution body to ensure fair and prompt resolution of conflicts.