和讯·2025-09-06 03:31Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the rise and fall of Yi Huiman, a prominent figure in China's financial sector, who has recently come under investigation for serious violations of discipline and law, marking a dramatic turn in his career from a celebrated "grassroots banker" to a subject of scrutiny by regulatory authorities [2][10]. Group 1: Yi Huiman's Career Progression - Yi Huiman, born in 1964 in Cangnan County, Wenzhou, Zhejiang Province, began his career in the financial sector in 1984 after graduating from Zhejiang Banking School [3]. - He held various positions within the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), including roles as the head of branches in Hangzhou and Jiangsu, where he significantly improved the bank's performance [3][4]. - In 2016, Yi was appointed Chairman of ICBC, where he oversaw a recovery in net profit, with the growth rate rebounding from 0.4% in 2016 to 4.1% by the end of 2018 [6]. Group 2: Tenure at the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) - Yi Huiman took over as the Chairman of the CSRC in January 2019, during which he led several key reforms in China's capital markets, including the launch of the Beijing Stock Exchange and the implementation of a comprehensive registration system [7][8]. - Under his leadership, the public fund industry experienced explosive growth, with the scale of public funds increasing from 13.78 trillion to 27.6 trillion yuan, and private funds from 12.71 trillion to 20.58 trillion yuan [8]. - The A-share market saw the Shanghai Composite Index rise from 2600 points to a peak of 3731 points in 2021, although it later faced declines due to the pandemic and economic pressures [9]. Group 3: Implications of Yi Huiman's Investigation - Yi Huiman's investigation coincides with a critical period of reform in China's capital markets, highlighting the challenges and controversies faced during his tenure [10]. - His fall from grace serves as a reflection of the broader narrative of financial regulation in China, emphasizing the need for both institutional innovation and stringent regulatory enforcement to mature the capital markets [10].