By George Ward
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has reportedly moved against Binance by filing a sealed motion. This unusual legal strategy, which involves submitting classified documents, has drawn the interest of legal and cryptocurrency enthusiasts regarding the motive behind the regulator’s decision.
Changing Legal Intrigues
The latest SEC motion is accompanied by 37 additional materials, including exhibits, a suggested order, and a statement from the trial lawyer, Jennifer Farer. In addition, the regulator’s motions and enforcement actions are generally made public through open filings.
However, using sealed documents is uncommon and is usually reserved for extreme circumstances. A former SEC official, John Reed Stark, suggests that the commission may have chosen this approach for one of two reasons.
According to Stark, one possible reason for the SEC’s sealed filing is to avoid interfering with a criminal investigation guided by the US Department of Justice (DoJ). According to reports, the DoJ is about to launch an investigation into the activities of Binance, which observers believe might include allegations of money laundering and other illegal financial activities.
Stark added that confidential grand jury proceedings may be underway, protected by US law, and the SEC’s intention could be to keep these proceedings private. Based on Stark’s assessment, the SEC is taking precautions by using sealed documents to ensure that its actions do not disrupt the DoJ’s moves.
Another possible reason, as suggested by the former official, is that the sealed motion could be what the commission feels is needed to protect the safety or identity of a witness or company involved in the case. Stark noted that redactions are commonly used to protect sensitive data without fully sealing the document in such scenarios.
Is Binance About To Face Criminal Charges?
Stark stated that the hidden document might have contained undisclosed accusations of illicit financial transactions such as money laundering or other possible illegal activities connected to Binance or its US subsidiary. Still, Stark believes that the concealed filing may provide information about the nature of an upcoming or previously filed covert criminal indictment against the crypto trading platform.
Furthermore, the DoJ is said to have initiated this indictment, which has been under wraps for some time. The former SEC official hoped that by delving into the sealed document, more clarity would be gained regarding the allegations and legal actions surrounding the crypto exchange.
In his analysis, Stark claimed that Binance is unlikely to contest the SEC’s motion for sealing. According to him, the exchange’s legal counsel may consider that the sensitive evidence or potentially damaging criminal accusations against it will surface if it contests this move.
However, the unusual nature of the SEC’s actions in this scenario makes Stark argue that the situation remains complex, making the eventual outcome difficult to predict. If Binance decides to challenge the SEC’s request for sealing, it may indicate that the motion is related to the SEC’s goal of protecting the identity of an unnamed witness.
The outcome of the SEC’s move and its potential impact on the Binance situation could be critical in defining future cryptocurrency rules and their implementation in the United States.