Abstract

The shift of the banking regime from the private sector to the public sector in the year after the 1960s, when nationalization of 14 big banks took place. The social control policy passed by the ordinance as the parliament was not functional. The nationalization was a boon or a bane, it became debatable then and now too. Moreover, the debate on social control or economic policy became a very hot topic at that time. The shift from private to public regime became devastating for the economy or the success of the economy. The banking sector saw a major change in that era. The key benefits of nationalizing banks include greater control over the banking system, enabling the government to use it as a tool for economic growth and development. Nationalization can also help to prevent financial crises and ensure the stability of the banking sector. Additionally, it can provide greater access to credit for small and medium-sized enterprises, as well as for individuals who may otherwise struggle to obtain financing. On the other hand, opponents of nationalization argue that it can lead to inefficiencies, lack of innovation and increased bureaucracy. Furthermore, critics argue that government ownership of banks can lead to political interference, which can undermine the independence of the banking system. Overall, the decision to nationalize banks is a complex and controversial issue, with various economic, social and political implications. It requires careful consideration of the benefits and drawbacks, as well as the broader economic and political context in which it is implemented.

Keywords