Koal(SH:603232) Zhong Guo Jing Ying Bao·2025-09-01 08:32Group 1 - The principle of "delisting does not exempt from liability" is reaffirmed, indicating that delisting is a starting point for accountability rather than an end point [1][2][3] - Regulatory bodies have significantly increased the accountability measures against delisted companies and their executives, with notable fines imposed on companies like Huatie Co. and Taihe Group [2][3] - A comprehensive accountability system has been established, targeting not only the delisted companies but also related parties, including intermediaries involved in fraudulent activities [4][5] Group 2 - The administrative penalties are designed to provide immediate deterrence, while criminal accountability serves as a high-pressure deterrent, and civil compensation, particularly through representative lawsuits, offers investor relief [5][6] - The introduction of representative lawsuits for investors marks a significant breakthrough in investor protection mechanisms, allowing for collective claims against delisted companies and their affiliates [6][7] - Intermediaries are now also being held accountable, as seen in the case of Geer Software, where they are pursuing compensation from parties involved in fraudulent activities [7] Group 3 - Continuous improvement of the accountability system is necessary, with suggestions for enhancing investor protection and streamlining the processes for civil and criminal accountability [8][9] - The need for clearer standards regarding the accountability of third parties involved in fraud is emphasized, along with the importance of strengthening recovery efforts from responsible parties [9][10] - Recommendations include improving data sharing among regulatory bodies and enhancing the efficiency of case handling, as well as exploring diversified dispute resolution mechanisms to lower the costs for small investors [10][11]