Discrepancies in iTV shareholder meeting records blow Pita shareholding case wide open

[webfact]

 

InTouch Holdings, which holds a holds a 52.92% stake in iTV, notified the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) today (Monday) that it is investigating a controversy regarding the actual status of the iTV media company.

 

In a letter to the SET, president and executive director of the company, Kim Siritaweechai, said that  the controversy, sparked by recent TV broadcasts, is of public interest and the company has formed a committee to look into it.

 

Last night, Channel 3’s “3-Miti-News” program revealed the minutes of the shareholders meeting on April 26th last night (Sunday), which reported that a shareholder, Panuwat Kwanyuen, asked the chair of the meeting, Kim Siritaweechai, whether iTV is still operational as a media firm.

 

In the minutes, Kim is reported to have said that iTV is still operational in accordance with the registered objectives of the company and that the company has submitted its balance sheet and corporate tax return to the Revenue Department as normal.

 

An audio clip, which was broadcast by reporter Thapanee Eadsrichai in the same news program, told a different story.

 

In the clip, Kim, in responding to Panuwat’s question about the status of iTV, is heard to have said that iTV has not been operating as a media company, pending the conclusion of a court case.

 

iTV has sued the secretariat of Prime Minister’s Office for scrapping its contract with iTV for the use of the UHF broadcast spectrum.

 

Full story: https://www.thaipbsworld.com/discrepancies-in-itv-shareholder-meeting-records-blow-pita-shareholding-case-wide-open/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2023-06-12

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

The most versatile and flexible rental investment and holiday home solution in Thailand - click for more information.

[cleopatra2]

The fact that the company is not currently carrying out any media activities is moot. The only relevant question , is the company still registered as a media company ?

 

In previous case of the printing business that no longer was operating , the court ruled that it was still a media business . Even though it had ceased to be operating any printing activities. The reasoning , the business had not official notified that it had ceased and thus could in future resurrect its printing activities.

[RandolphGB]

Good. This should finally dispel any fanciful ideas of democracy in Thailand.

 

Back to the status quo of military and 'establishment' rule like it has been for the last 100+ years.

[anchadian]

THREAD: There’s been some developments in the controversy of

@Pita_MFP’s shares in a dormant media company, the subject of numerous complaints  seeking his disqualification as MP and preventing him to became PM. These revelations could turn things in his favor.

 

Part 1 to 9 continued here:

https://twitter.com/SaksithCNA/status/1668137539277058048

 

 

[hotchilli]

It is it isn't, he had he hasn't, they are they' aren't, they will they won't...

cut the games and give us a bl**dy answer one way or the other.Thailand is starting to look like a dysfunctional child.

 

[onthedarkside]

A reported post has been removed. 

 

16. The Bangkok Post, Khaosod, Pattaya Mail and the Phuket News do not allow quotes from their news articles or other material to appear on ASEAN NOW. Neither do they allow links to their publications. Posts from members containing quotes from or links to the Bangkok Post, Khaosod, Pattaya Mail and the Phuket News publications will be deleted from the forum. These restrictions are put in place by the above publications, not by ASEAN NOW. In rare cases, forum administrators or the news team may use these sources under special permission.

[wensiensheng]

3 minutes ago, hotchilli said:

It is it isn't, he had he hasn't, they are they' aren't, they will they won't...

cut the games and give us a bl**dy answer one way or the other.Thailand is starting to look like a dysfunctional child.

 

“Starting”?

 

where have you been for the last decade…..or so.

[candide]

There is obviously a grey zone concerning these media shares. That's the ideal condition for a political decision. A relevant questions in this perspective: is it better to get him now, or later by another mean? 

[sammieuk1]

Very rich very cleaver very articulate very popular "v" unelected mafia = very possible catastrophe ????

[Grandpa Cool]

14 minutes ago, hotchilli said:

It is it isn't, he had he hasn't, they are they' aren't, they will they won't...

cut the games and give us a bl**dy answer one way or the other.Thailand is starting to look like a dysfunctional child.

 

Starting? Thailand has never been properly functional..... dysfunction is the norm.

[CMBob]

1 hour ago, cleopatra2 said:

The fact that the company is not currently carrying out any media activities is moot. The only relevant question , is the company still registered as a media company ?

Does the statute prohibit owning shares in a "registered media company" or a "media company?"  Could be a difference.

[Thaindrew]

1 hour ago, cleopatra2 said:

The fact that the company is not currently carrying out any media activities is moot. The only relevant question , is the company still registered as a media company ?

 

In previous case of the printing business that no longer was operating , the court ruled that it was still a media business . Even though it had ceased to be operating any printing activities. The reasoning , the business had not official notified that it had ceased and thus could in future resurrect its printing activities.

not without the cancelled broadcast contract ... 

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

iTV is still operational in accordance with the registered objectives of the company and that the company has submitted its balance sheet and corporate tax return to the Revenue Department as normal.

Yes, operational in the sense of accounting requirements but what do the balance sheet and tax return reflect from the perspective of a working (aka "operational) aspect? Any gross/net income and/or operational expenses (apart from its PM lawsuit) one might find with a business operation?

It might be that the only source for operational income would come from its contract with the Prime Minister's Office.

If iTV was technically structured to only operate with such contract, it may not have alternatives on demand like the printing company for substitute contracts. Thus, lawsuit that allegedly ceased operational status of the company ensues. 

Bottom line is the term "operational" can have different applications at the same time. In which case the law maybe too vague, particularly when used in an extreme political situation to dismiss a winning candidate for PM. I'm sure the new government will enact a more viable law. 

[Laughing Gravy]

3 hours ago, webfact said:

is of public interest and the company has formed a committee to look into it.

Oh dear. So we know how effective that will be.

[Gknrd]

Thai soap opera. Produced and directed by the Military and the rich. 

[Purdey]

A pity the junta members don't own media shares. They clearly know something MF didn't know 

[DJ54]

Welcome back my friends the shows about to start… a bit of music trivia

[Reigntax]

2 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

The fact that the company is not currently carrying out any media activities is moot. The only relevant question , is the company still registered as a media company ?

 

In previous case of the printing business that no longer was operating , the court ruled that it was still a media business . Even though it had ceased to be operating any printing activities. The reasoning , the business had not official notified that it had ceased and thus could in future resurrect its printing activities.

The article states the situation clearly. The only course of business is finalising a court case. And I would assume cannot be deregistered until this is finalised.

Originally registered as a type of business is irrelevant Compared to what the business actually does or doesn’t do.

 

[Eleftheros]

1 hour ago, hotchilli said:

Thailand is starting to look like a dysfunctional child.

"Starting to"? When did it ever stop?

[Dr B]

It seems to me that there is a very dangerous legal precedent that I think has already been set by the Constitutional Court, and I also believe that there is no appeal against a Constitutional Court ruling. The dangerous precedent is considering what might be done. I think it is a fundamental principle of law internationally that you can only be charged and found guilty based on what you have done, not on what you might do. Any of us might commit a crime next week, and it impossible to prove that we would not. Even conspiracy, or intent to commit a crime, requires evidence that planning was taking place, not just thinking about it.

I believe that, in one of the Thanaporn cases, he was found guilty because of what he, or the company, might have done in the future. As I have mentioned before, I am aware that a business cannot operate in areas not covered by its articles of incorporation, but it does not need to operate in all areas covered by its articles. It is therefore normal practice to include things that might be useful in the future. Similarly one may have TV Broadcasting in ones articles, but if your licence is revoked you may not operate. Surely it would be normal to continue to operate in other areas, such as advertising, if covered by the articles? To say that iTV could still become a media company again is ignoring the requirement for a licence, which I think is also required for publishing a newspaper. Any shareholders for whom that is a problem would need to divest the shares before those new operations commenced.

[realfunster]

This is being milked to death now.

- It is not an operating company.

- His/family shares amount to 0.003% (or similar).

 

It really is a total non-issue to any reasonable and impartial observer.

I saw another article highlighting Pita was facing 10 years in jail for this - get a grip.

 

Anyway, it makes good copy I suppose during this transitional period.

 

If my assessment is wrong, then expect chaos to ensue...

[snoop1130]

Move Forward suspects foul play in controversy over iTV’s legal status

 

 

The Move Forward party is demanding that the chairman of iTV and president and executive director of its holding company Intouch Holdings, Kim Siritaweechai, explain the discrepancy between his statement during and the minutes of the company’s shareholder meeting regarding iTV’s status as a media company.

 

Move Forward Secretary-General Chaithawat Tulathon said at a news conference today (Monday) that he suspects that the minutes of the iTV shareholder meeting on April 26th, chaired by Kim, were intentionally doctored, to give the impression that the company is still operating as a media firm, which could be used to prevent Move Forward party leader Pita Limjaroenrat from becoming the next prime minister of Thailand.

 

He also claimed that there appears to be a conspiracy to block Pita, the party’s prime ministerial candidate, from assuming the post, citing the strange coincidence of electoral candidate Nick Sangsirinavin writing on Facebook about Pita’s alleged shareholding on April 24th, two days ahead of the iTV shareholder meeting.

 

Full Story: https://www.thaipbsworld.com/move-forward-suspects-foul-play-in-controversy-over-itvs-legal-status/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2023-06-12

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

The most versatile and flexible rental investment and holiday home solution in Thailand - click for more information.

[jesimps]

1 hour ago, Purdey said:

A pity the junta members don't own media shares. They clearly know something MF didn't know 

It's part of the electoral rules (even if in this case it's a grey area of was it/wasn't it operational) so the legal department of all parties contesting an election should avoid it. That's why I keep saying that MFP ought to have known pre-election that Prayuth would leap on this in his search for a reason not to relinquish power. With the EC, Senate and Judiciary behind him, I know (regretfully) who my money's on. 

 

[n00dle]

Quote

Discrepancies in iTV shareholder meeting records blow Pita shareholding case wide open

read the post, read the artice, now please expalin to me what exactly has been blown wide open?

[zzaa09]

3 hours ago, sammieuk1 said:

Very rich very cleaver very articulate very popular "v" unelected mafia = very possible catastrophe ????

Yet, this is how the provinces are run - never mind the national scene. 

 

[Eric Loh]

The ball at the Election Commission's feet following accusation of corruption to alter the minutes and the financial report to DBD that alleged iTV is still a media company. They have to investigate the descrepancies of the minutes and also the report sent to DBD by the iTV secretariat. EC can't accept the case without thorough investigation. If they don't investigate the complaints, it is a grave dereliction of duty and can result in impeaching the commissioners. 

[redwood1]

Uncle Prayuth, is just looking out for the people........lol..........

[WHansen]

1 hour ago, n00dle said:

read the post, read the artice, now please expalin to me what exactly has been blown wide open?

I read and understood it. It's looking like the junta and its supporters will try by hook or by crook to stop the will of the people.

 

The international observers must be shaking their heads in disbelief.

[anchadian]

(1/2) The National Anti-Corruption Commission secretary general Niwatchai Kasemmongkol said on Monday Move Forward leader #Pita Limjaroenrat has until June 18, or less than a week, to declare his assets as former MP. Niwatchai said 70% of former MPs have submitted it.

 

(2/2) He added Pita has requested for deferment but whether it will be permitted or not will have to be considered.

 

https://twitter.com/KhaosodEnglish/status/1668203548839133185

 

[bannork]

2 hours ago, Dr B said:

It seems to me that there is a very dangerous legal precedent that I think has already been set by the Constitutional Court, and I also believe that there is no appeal against a Constitutional Court ruling. The dangerous precedent is considering what might be done. I think it is a fundamental principle of law internationally that you can only be charged and found guilty based on what you have done, not on what you might do. Any of us might commit a crime next week, and it impossible to prove that we would not. Even conspiracy, or intent to commit a crime, requires evidence that planning was taking place, not just thinking about it.

I believe that, in one of the Thanaporn cases, he was found guilty because of what he, or the company, might have done in the future. As I have mentioned before, I am aware that a business cannot operate in areas not covered by its articles of incorporation, but it does not need to operate in all areas covered by its articles. It is therefore normal practice to include things that might be useful in the future. Similarly one may have TV Broadcasting in ones articles, but if your licence is revoked you may not operate. Surely it would be normal to continue to operate in other areas, such as advertising, if covered by the articles? To say that iTV could still become a media company again is ignoring the requirement for a licence, which I think is also required for publishing a newspaper. Any shareholders for whom that is a problem would need to divest the shares before those new operations commenced.

The EC dismissed the petitions that would have led to the Constitutional Court. Rather they said Pita may have known all along he was ineligible, thus any case will be considered by the Criminal Court, a court where the burden of proof has to be beyond reasonable doubt.

Note Thanathon's case was never sent to the Criminal Court and his case was more straightforward, he owned 5% of the shares and in his name