Thai Court Admits Petition Seeking To Revoke Shin's Licenses

[Jai Dee]

Thai Court Admits Petition Seeking to Revoke Shin's Licenses

Oct. 5 (Bloomberg) -- A Thai court agreed to consider a petition seeking to revoke the licenses of Advanced Info Service Pcl and two other companies controlled by Shin Corp., which was earlier this year sold to investors led by Temasek Holdings Pte.

The Supreme Administrative Court will examine an application filed by Satra Toh-on, a lecturer at Rangsit University, according to a statement on the court's Web site. The court reversed a decision by a lower court, which on March 22 refused to consider the filing, the statement said.

Singapore's state-owned Temasek in January led investors who bought Bangkok-based Shin Corp. from the family of then Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, which didn't pay tax on the $1.9 billion of proceeds. The deal sparked protests against Thaksin that culminated in his ouster in a Sept. 19 military coup. The commerce ministry has separately asked the police to investigate whether the investors breached caps on foreign ownership.

Satra is asking the court to order the government to revoke licenses given to Advanced Info, the country's biggest mobile phone company, Shin Satellite Pcl and ITV Pcl. The petition argues the licenses should be revoked because the companies are now controlled by foreigners, according to the statement on the court's Web site.

Thai law bars foreigners from owning more than half of a phone company or television network in the country.

"Shin and the companies in its group will continue their business as normal as the court has not come up with any ruling,'' said Rachadawan Sanitwong Na Ayuttaya, manager of corporate communications at Shin, declining further comment.

Wilai Keangpradoo, a spokeswoman at Advanced Info, declined to comment. Temasek officials weren't immediately available for comment.

Temasek manages $81 billion of assets for Singapore's government and in January joined Thai investors to buy 49.6 percent of Shin from Thaksin's family. They later raised its stake to more than 96 percent through a tender offer.

The petition calls for the court to order TOT Pcl, a state- run phone company, to revoke the license of Advanced Info, and the transport ministry to cancel Shin Satellite's license. Satra is also asking the prime minister's office to revoke the license held by ITV.

Source: Bloomberg - 5 October 2006

[Jai Dee]

Thai court to hear Shin unit licence case

BANGKOK (Reuters) - A Thai court agreed on Thursday to hear a petition to revoke the licences of three Shin Corp. affiliates over alleged violation of foreign ownership laws following Shin's $3.8 billion sale to Singapore's Temasek.

The Supreme Administrative Court overturned a lower court's rejection of the case filed against state agencies in March by a law professor after relatives of ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra sold their Shin stakes to Temasek in January.

The court said the licences for a mobile phone company, satellite operator and television broadcaster could affect national security if in foreign hands.

"The petitioner is a citizen who has been affected because state agencies did not prevent damage and the defendants neglected their duties," Judge Sompop Pongsawang said.

"The court overrules the Central Administrative Court and will hear the case," he told the court.

The tax-free deal and questions about its legality under foreign ownership laws have forced unprecedented scrutiny of the Shin sale, which set off a political crisis that led to Thaksin's overthrow in a bloodless coup last month.

On Monday, a Commerce Ministry probe found that Temasek's purchase of Shin through several affiliates may have broken foreign ownership laws and it sent its findings to police.

Temasek has said it complied with Thai laws.

The three firms affected by Thursday's court ruling are Thailand's biggest mobile phone provider, Advanced Info Service, satellite operator Shin Satellite PCL and television broadcaster ITV PCL.

In his petition, Rangsit University law professor Satra Tohon argued that the Shin sale violated the Alien Business Law, which limits foreign ownership of Thai firms to 49 percent.

Satra accused the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Ministry, Transport Ministry and Prime Minister's Office -- which issued the licences -- of neglect.

The Central Administrative Court tossed out the case in March, ruling that Satra had not been affected because he was not a contractual party to the deal.

But the Supreme Administrative Court said the three firms provided services that could affect Thai national security.

"If the licences of the three companies are held by the management of foreign companies, it may cause damage and undermine the country's security in the future because it could give them access to secret information about users in the telecommunications business," the judge said.

Officials at Shin Corp and AIS said they would cooperate with the court's investigation.

"We will have to wait for the judicial process. For our part, we complied with Thai laws," said Shin corporate affairs manager Rachadawan Sanitwong Na Ayuttaya.

AIS spokeswoman Wilai Keangprdoo said service to 17 million customers would not be affected while the case winds its way through the courts.

Shares in Shin Corp. and AIS fell after the court ruling. By the midsession, AIS was off 1.7 percent at 87 baht, but Shin Corp. rallied from earlier falls to stand 0.9 percent higher at 29.25 baht.

Shin Sat shares rose 0.7 percent and ITV stock was up 1.4 percent. The overall Thai stock market was up 0.7 percent.

Source: Reuters - 5 October 2006

[womble]

Thai court to hear Shin unit licence case

BANGKOK (Reuters) - A Thai court agreed on Thursday to hear a petition to revoke the licences of three Shin Corp. affiliates over alleged violation of foreign ownership laws following Shin's $3.8 billion sale to Singapore's Temasek.

The Supreme Administrative Court overturned a lower court's rejection of the case filed against state agencies in March by a law professor after relatives of ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra sold their Shin stakes to Temasek in January.

The court said the licences for a mobile phone company, satellite operator and television broadcaster could affect national security if in foreign hands.

"The petitioner is a citizen who has been affected because state agencies did not prevent damage and the defendants neglected their duties," Judge Sompop Pongsawang said.

"The court overrules the Central Administrative Court and will hear the case," he told the court.

The tax-free deal and questions about its legality under foreign ownership laws have forced unprecedented scrutiny of the Shin sale, which set off a political crisis that led to Thaksin's overthrow in a bloodless coup last month.

On Monday, a Commerce Ministry probe found that Temasek's purchase of Shin through several affiliates may have broken foreign ownership laws and it sent its findings to police.

Temasek has said it complied with Thai laws.

The three firms affected by Thursday's court ruling are Thailand's biggest mobile phone provider, Advanced Info Service, satellite operator Shin Satellite PCL and television broadcaster ITV PCL.

In his petition, Rangsit University law professor Satra Tohon argued that the Shin sale violated the Alien Business Law, which limits foreign ownership of Thai firms to 49 percent.

Satra accused the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Ministry, Transport Ministry and Prime Minister's Office -- which issued the licences -- of neglect.

The Central Administrative Court tossed out the case in March, ruling that Satra had not been affected because he was not a contractual party to the deal.

But the Supreme Administrative Court said the three firms provided services that could affect Thai national security.

"If the licences of the three companies are held by the management of foreign companies, it may cause damage and undermine the country's security in the future because it could give them access to secret information about users in the telecommunications business," the judge said.

Officials at Shin Corp and AIS said they would cooperate with the court's investigation.

"We will have to wait for the judicial process. For our part, we complied with Thai laws," said Shin corporate affairs manager Rachadawan Sanitwong Na Ayuttaya.

AIS spokeswoman Wilai Keangprdoo said service to 17 million customers would not be affected while the case winds its way through the courts.

Shares in Shin Corp. and AIS fell after the court ruling. By the midsession, AIS was off 1.7 percent at 87 baht, but Shin Corp. rallied from earlier falls to stand 0.9 percent higher at 29.25 baht.

Shin Sat shares rose 0.7 percent and ITV stock was up 1.4 percent. The overall Thai stock market was up 0.7 percent.

Source: Reuters - 5 October 2006

This is a very important statement by the courts and to me it signals that they have worked out a way to get Thaskin without the disastrous effects of going down the nominee foreign ownership route.

They will say it is a danger to the national security of the country. By doing this they can make the deal void without the disastrous effects on foreign investment that the other option would lead to.

As each day passes the more I believe that Thaksin will somehow loose a considerable amount of his wealth.

I doubt they'll press criminal charges (although it would be amazing for the future of this country if they did), but it does look like he won't get away with keeping all of his plundered billions.

Edited October 5, 2006 by womble

[chownah]

If the deal is not allowed...or reversed...will the shares go back to the previous owners....meaning Toxin's family members?....they were the rightful owners before the sale and to the best of my knowledge their ownership was never disputed...nor was Toxin's ownership of the shares previous to the share transfer to his family at his entry into politics.

Since the ownership of the shares was never controversial before thier sales to Temasek it seems only right that ownership should revert to the proper owners....the Toxin family.

Chownah

[PeaceBlondie]

No, the Shitawatra family sold it to the butler and the maid, the gardner and the chauffer. The court can award the ownership to the household servants - remember?

[womble]

I guess it would revert back to the original owners, although the company would be without the concessions as they would be cancelled. So the company would be in serious trouble and stock price would be extremely low with no sign of a way to recover.

I can't see toxin handing back the $$$ though.

Remember what he said to Monson??

[chownah]

Womble,

Why should the people who sold thier shares "give back" the money? It is their money...their ownership is not at question here. If concessions are canceled because of wrongdoing, then I guess that's ok, if that's the way these things are handled. On the other hand if the concessions are canceled then why should the transaction be canceled? Seems to me they should do whatever needs to be done to be sure that the laws are upheld and enforced...but it seems like alot of people here are just interested in revenge and are willing to ignore the true facts of ownership in this quest.

Chownah

PeaceBlondie,

I agree with you completely...if it was the butler or gardner or maid then the shares should go back to them but I think you will find that the vast vast bulk did not go to the servants but to the actual family members.

Chownah

[dan10400]

Thai court to hear Shin unit licence case

But the Supreme Administrative Court said the three firms provided services that could affect Thai national security.

"If the licences of the three companies are held by the management of foreign companies, it may cause damage and undermine the country's security in the future because it could give them access to secret information about users in the telecommunications business," the judge said.

isn't this the same type of ploy that got Thaksin into the telecom business on the cheap in the first

place? i had heard he got some laws passed along these same 'national security' lines and then

bought the assets of the foreign firm on the cheap.

this is a quesiton requesting clarification.

thx/

[Plus]

This year alone Temasek invested 13 billion dollars. Only 2 bil went to Shin. They can just write it off, it's peanuts.

Is it possible that some other peole will come on board, with their own money, get majority control from Temasek, and reapply for concessions and licences? Same as with Airasia - they moved so fast they didn't even lose the original license.

[maxx]

Singapore=sucker, thaksin promise them a smooth sailing, sure sail right into the reef.

[ratcatcher]

Womble,

Why should the people who sold thier shares "give back" the money? It is their money...their ownership is not at question here. If concessions are canceled because of wrongdoing, then I guess that's ok, if that's the way these things are handled. On the other hand if the concessions are canceled then why should the transaction be canceled? Seems to me they should do whatever needs to be done to be sure that the laws are upheld and enforced...but it seems like alot of people here are just interested in revenge and are willing to ignore the true facts of ownership in this quest.

Chownah

PeaceBlondie,

I agree with you completely...if it was the butler or gardner or maid then the shares should go back to them but I think you will find that the vast vast bulk did not go to the servants but to the actual family members.

Chownah

Chownah, I think you make a very good point based on a straightforward legal situation, ie if the concessions are cancelled then the shares should go back to the "registered" owners, be they maid, gardener or chief cook and bottle washer in the Toxin household or even the Shitawatra family, who as you rightly mention, probably held the majority. .

However you mention ' people interested in revenge': That maybe the crux of the matter.

Many Thais , particularly the better educated and informed members of the populace, see what Toxin did to the country over the last 5 years with his shady deals with offshore banks, holding companies, nominees,subterfuge and plain outright in-your-face cronyism with most of the mega projects that he instigated through his party.

The list of stinking deals has been posted on here and discussed ad nauseum but basically I guess the Thai people would like to see him held accountable and maybe lose some of those gains that were indeed 'ill-gotten'. That would at least make him lose a little bit of face which in Asia is all-important. He has lost a lot of 'face' since September the 19th, in the eyes of the rest of the world that knew him.

He and his family will certainly never want for anything in this world that's for sure. Not sure about his after life though.

Edited October 5, 2006 by ratcatcher

[Plus]

I think they'll just stop on wrestling managerial control over national assets from Singapore. Probably by pushing out that Thai-Malaysian businessmen and renegotiating voting rights and dividends.

[Tony Clifton]

If the deal is not allowed...or reversed...will the shares go back to the previous owners....meaning Toxin's family members?....they were the rightful owners before the sale and to the best of my knowledge their ownership was never disputed...nor was Toxin's ownership of the shares previous to the share transfer to his family at his entry into politics.

Since the ownership of the shares was never controversial before thier sales to Temasek it seems only right that ownership should revert to the proper owners....the Toxin family.

Chownah

Even if the shares went back to their original owners, see below about the AEC (Assets Examination Committee):

Authority and duties:

- Investigate any projects or acts by members of the Thaksin government and others who are suspected of irregularities, including tax evasion.

l Call for information from related agencies including the Office of the Auditor-General, the National Counter Corruption Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Bank of Thailand, the Anti-Money Laundering Office, financial institutions, the Lands Department and the Revenue Department.

- Seize or freeze the assets of the suspects, their spouses and minor-age children

Procedure:

- Probe results are considered a legal investigation and can be submitted to the Attorney-General or the Supreme Court's Criminal Division for Holders of Political Positions for legal action.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/06...cs_30015510.php

Within the next few days, we're about to be stunned by their findings and the extent of the looting that went on. The Shin sale will melt.

Edited October 5, 2006 by Tony Clifton

[Jai Dee]

Shin Corp deal in jeopardy

Lower court ordered to hear case on licences for AIS, ShinSat and iTV in interest of 'national security and consumers'

The Supreme Adminis-trative Court released an appeal decision yesterday ordering its lower court to review an administrative case that could see Shin Corp lose its licences for communication satellites, mobile phone services and television broadcasting.

"The judicial review against Shin Corp is warranted because the licences in question involved com-munication services which can impact on the public, national security and consumers," the senior court said in its verdict.

The ruling follows a decision by the Central Administrative Court in March not to hear the case because complainant Sastra Toaon, a law lecturer, had no contractual link to the Shin takeover.

Sastra launched the litigation after the family of ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra sold the tele-com giant to Singapore's Temasek Holdings in January.

He said the sale violated the foreign ownership law after Temasek increased its equity stakes in Shin from 49 per cent to 96 per cent.

The new ownership structure had allowed an alien business to gain control over the operations of Shin Satellite Plc, Advance Info Service (AIS) Plc and iTV Plc, all of which are subsidiaries of Shin, he said.

Sastra petitioned for a court order instructing three concerned agencies - the Information and Communications Technology Ministry, state-run TOT Plc and Prime Minister's Office, to revoke concession agreements signed with Shin Corp.

The Supreme Administrative Court ruled for the judicial review to commence - and ordered Sastra to refrain from speculating on the judicial proceedings of the case.

After the decision, Sastra also asked the court for a provisional order to prevent Temasek earning any benefits from the three companies' licences.

Under administrative judicial procedures, the three agencies will have to present their respective defence arguments in 30 days out-lining why they continue to enforce the concession agreements despite the ownership changes.

Somchai Thean-Anant, acting president of TOT Plc, which grants the mobile-phone concession to AIS, said the state agency already had legal experts prepared to cope with a court hearing on the case and possible legal impacts.

Earlier, TOT said its concession contract did not specify that the concessionaire must be majority owned by Thais. It just required the concessionaire to be a juristic body.

Kraisorn Pornsutee, permanent secretary at the ICT Ministry, which owns Shinsat's satellite concession, said he would call all relevant parties to discuss the matter and prepare information for the court.

After the court's decision to proceed, AIS president Wichian Mektrakarn said the case was a matter for Shin Corp shareholders. He said AIS had not broken any law.

The legal proceedings cover AIS, Shin Satellite, and iTV. AIS is now Shin's flagship business, contributing nearly 90 per cent of the

holding company's revenue. If stripped off the licences, AIS would be a skeleton company, given that nearly all its revenue comes from mobile-phone services. In the second quarter, its booked service income of Bt18.42 billion, and Bt4.13 billion in net profit.

Temasek's take-over of Shin Corp has led to claims that AIS, Shinsat and iTV are now Singaporean firms. Currently, Cedar Holdings and Aspen Holdings, which are both linked to Temasek, own 54.53 per cent and 41.76 per cent, respectively, of Shin.

The court case adds to the pressure on Temasek, which also faces a police probe into whether Kularb Kaew, Cedar, Aspen and Cypress Holdings are nominees for a foreign entity and thus breach the Alien Business Law.

Shin now owns 41.34 per cent of ShinSat, which has four satellites - Thaicom 1, 2, 5 and iPSTAR. ShinSat won a 30-year-concession from the Transport Ministry in Sept 1991.

Shin, which purchased 17 per cent of iTV in May 2000, now owns 52.93 per cent of the free-TV operator.

Shin also owns 42.8 per cent of AIS, which has over 17.5 million subscribers. AIS won a 20-year-concession from TOT in March 1990.

Thai AirAsia, which also operates with a local licence, narrowly escaped being part of the case after Shin unloaded its 25 per cent in the airline to Asia Aviation Co Ltd. Asia Aviation was a joint venture between Shin and a logistics businessman.

Source: The Nation - 6 October 2006

[Scott]

I think much of this has to do with what, if any, illegal activity was involved. I don't think it is a matter of returning shares to previous owners, if those owners are found guilty of something surrounding the deal.

It would, however, be doubly sad and very bad for the reputation of Thailand if the shares were taken from the current company and the money not returned. It's hard to see how the Singapore company broke the law.

[womble]

Womble,

Why should the people who sold thier shares "give back" the money? It is their money...their ownership is not at question here. If concessions are canceled because of wrongdoing, then I guess that's ok, if that's the way these things are handled. On the other hand if the concessions are canceled then why should the transaction be canceled? Seems to me they should do whatever needs to be done to be sure that the laws are upheld and enforced...but it seems like alot of people here are just interested in revenge and are willing to ignore the true facts of ownership in this quest.

Chownah

PeaceBlondie,

I agree with you completely...if it was the butler or gardner or maid then the shares should go back to them but I think you will find that the vast vast bulk did not go to the servants but to the actual family members.

Chownah

To be honest I think the concessions should be cancelled, but the sale should stay. I also think that Temesek should be forced to make the tender offer for 100 baht a share that they didn't have to make at the time of the sale. Temesek colluded with Thaksin in order to get away with not making the tender offer at market price, this is very unfair to the shareholders.

So Temesek should be forced to buy up all remaining shares at the 100 baht price that should have been offered for the tender. Then they will be left with a company with no concessions which quite frankly is the fairest thing. This means shareholders can get out

This is a good solution as the ordinary shareholder doesn't loose out, only the two parties that colluded for their own benefits at the expense of others.

However we are forgetting one thing. It is the responsibility of each and every shareholder to carry out their own due dilligence. Only a fool would think that the huge gains in shins shareprice had nothing to do with Thaksins manipulation of laws towards shin. It was obvious that should Thaksin fall from grace this was a possible yet unlikely scenario. Greed left many to take the risk to hold onto the stock.

It was obvious throughout thaksins leadership that he was up to know good. Creating policy to benefit his company is great when you are a shareholder, but not so great when things go horribly wrong and people start to ask quetions.

anyone who carried out their due dilligence should have known this was a possibility, those that didn't carry out due dilligence should stick to index funds or bonds and stay away from single stock investments.

[chownah]

Scott,

I hope that all illegal activity is found out and punished...but I'm not thinking that this will actually happen.

One possible way that the Singapore company may have broken the law in the purchase is if they created an illegal proxy to avoid a foreign ownership limit...or if they colluded with Thai officials to change laws or ignore laws related to such transfers to avoid restrictions.

I would like to point out that illegal practices such as this probably occur quite regularly in Thailand and in fact throughout most of Asia. It has long been known by business people that asian companies have a much better chance of landing contracts in asia than western companies...this is do to the difference in business culture....one of these differences is that the asians know who to find out who to bribe and how to bribe them.....the western companies usuallly didn't have clue about this but in recent years they have learned more about how this is done and usually hire local people into thier upper echelon who know how this is done. At least this is what I have heard. I am just a rice farmer and don't have these sorts of problems to deal with in my life usually.

Chownah

[Old Man River]

Thai court to hear Shin unit licence case

BANGKOK (Reuters) - A Thai court agreed on Thursday to hear a petition to revoke the licences of three Shin Corp. affiliates over alleged violation of foreign ownership laws following Shin's $3.8 billion sale to Singapore's Temasek.

The Supreme Administrative Court overturned a lower court's rejection of the case filed against state agencies in March by a law professor after relatives of ousted Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra sold their Shin stakes to Temasek in January.

The court said the licences for a mobile phone company, satellite operator and television broadcaster could affect national security if in foreign hands.

"The petitioner is a citizen who has been affected because state agencies did not prevent damage and the defendants neglected their duties," Judge Sompop Pongsawang said.

"The court overrules the Central Administrative Court and will hear the case," he told the court.

The tax-free deal and questions about its legality under foreign ownership laws have forced unprecedented scrutiny of the Shin sale, which set off a political crisis that led to Thaksin's overthrow in a bloodless coup last month.

On Monday, a Commerce Ministry probe found that Temasek's purchase of Shin through several affiliates may have broken foreign ownership laws and it sent its findings to police.

Temasek has said it complied with Thai laws.

The three firms affected by Thursday's court ruling are Thailand's biggest mobile phone provider, Advanced Info Service, satellite operator Shin Satellite PCL and television broadcaster ITV PCL.

In his petition, Rangsit University law professor Satra Tohon argued that the Shin sale violated the Alien Business Law, which limits foreign ownership of Thai firms to 49 percent.

Satra accused the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Ministry, Transport Ministry and Prime Minister's Office -- which issued the licences -- of neglect.

The Central Administrative Court tossed out the case in March, ruling that Satra had not been affected because he was not a contractual party to the deal.

But the Supreme Administrative Court said the three firms provided services that could affect Thai national security.

"If the licences of the three companies are held by the management of foreign companies, it may cause damage and undermine the country's security in the future because it could give them access to secret information about users in the telecommunications business," the judge said.

Officials at Shin Corp and AIS said they would cooperate with the court's investigation.

"We will have to wait for the judicial process. For our part, we complied with Thai laws," said Shin corporate affairs manager Rachadawan Sanitwong Na Ayuttaya.

AIS spokeswoman Wilai Keangprdoo said service to 17 million customers would not be affected while the case winds its way through the courts.

Shares in Shin Corp. and AIS fell after the court ruling. By the midsession, AIS was off 1.7 percent at 87 baht, but Shin Corp. rallied from earlier falls to stand 0.9 percent higher at 29.25 baht.

Shin Sat shares rose 0.7 percent and ITV stock was up 1.4 percent. The overall Thai stock market was up 0.7 percent.

Source: Reuters - 5 October 2006

This is a very important statement by the courts and to me it signals that they have worked out a way to get Thaskin without the disastrous effects of going down the nominee foreign ownership route.

They will say it is a danger to the national security of the country. By doing this they can make the deal void without the disastrous effects on foreign investment that the other option would lead to.

Interestingly, what you have above is what I wrote on October 2nd in another thread. My crystal ball must be working.

If the deal is voided, it will either be backdated to the date of the original transaction, or at a later date. In either case, the shares would revert back to the people who sold them, and they must return the funds to Temasek et. al. If the sale is voided back to the original transaction date, it should be dollar for dollar. It at a later date, Temasek et. al. can claim a share of profits.

Taxes are a separate issue. If backdated to the original date, no taxes would be owing. If backdated to a later date, and the court's decide the Shinawatra family should have paid taxes, then they will have to pay and then reclaim them. In this case, since they would not have the proceeds of the sale to pay the taxes prior to reclaiming them, it would require other funds be used, opening up numerous possibilities and tactics (although I hope it would not come to this).

Womble, good point on the share price. The share price would continue to come under great pressure until fund managers get comfortable on SHIN's stability. A contributing factor on share price is the uncertainty of whether local banks would continue to support SHIN if previous management returns, sans Dr. Thaksin.

Plus, I think you have hit it on the head as to how this will play out. Management control can be relinquished while still keeping Temasek and other long term foreign investors happy. Presently, Temasek has not put a lot of their own people on SHIN's board and operative management remains Thai. The issues relating to the nominee structure relates primarily to the uncertainty about the Malaysian based Thai. If his block is sold to Thai's based in Thailand, perceptions would be a lot different. Due to the size of the transaction, shares would have to be sold to a number of different people, thus diluting ownership. Hence, Temasek would be the majority shareholder, while Thai's in the aggregate would own more than foreigners. The issue on the nominee structure would thus be avoided.

Of course, the Malaysian Thai would not want to take a loss, as he would be selling shares with a market price below what he paid for them, but here Temasek would have to reimburse him the difference. If, in reality, he was a nominee, that would be acceptable to Temasek, and if he wasn't a nominee, then it still should be acceptible to Temasek to get this behind them.

[Barney_the_Dinosaur]

If the concessions are cancelled the Shinawatra's ain't giving anyone any money back.

Temasek is simply left holding an unlicensed telecoms asset that can't telecommunicate.

[Khun Jean]

Temasek should read this forum. The advice given here a few hundred times is also valid for them.

"Never invest more money in Thailand than that you can walk away from".

[Jai Dee]

Shin Corp Plc in deep trouble

The Supreme Administrative Court yesterday instructed the Central Administrative Court to accept a law lecturer's petition requesting the court to order three government agencies to cancel telecommunication concessions granted to Shin Corp's associates.

The lawsuit was filed by Professor Sattra Toh-On (นายศาสตรา โตอ่อน), , of Rangsit University, who asked the Supreme Administrative Court to order the Central Administrative Court, which previously rejected his petition against three government agencies, to accept it.

In the complaint he lodged with the Central Administrative Court, Mr Sattra accused the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Ministry, the Transport Ministry and the Prime Minister's Office of negligence of duty.

Mr Sattra claimed that the government agencies had failed to invalidate all the state concessions they had granted to Shin Corp's associates after the Shinawatra and Damapong families sold their majority stake in Shin Corp to Temasek Holdings.

Mr Sattra requested that the Central Administrative Court order the ICT Ministry to cancel the concession held by Advance Info Service (AIS) and the Transport Ministry to cancel the satellite concession held by Shin Satellite; and finally the PM's Office to cancel the television broadcast concession granted to iTV.

The Administrative Court has advised Mr. Satra to be cautious when being interviewed by media, nevertheless, all defendants should submit their objection letter within 30 days.

Source: Thai National News Bureau Public Relations Department - 06 October 2006

[womble]

Temasek should read this forum. The advice given here a few hundred times is also valid for them.

"Never invest more money in Thailand than that you can walk away from".

Yeah, it should read like investing in options, only use risk capital.

Saying that, I guess the amount Temasek invested is risk capital to them.

I'm sure they were perfectly aware of the risks.

We were, so it's a bit silly to assume that a huge investment arm wouldn't be.

[Sing_Sling]

From this side Temasek Holdings is already looking at the case very carfully and in the early stages of planning their steps.

They did nonthing illegal and if the government voids the value of Shin's shares then I doubt Temasek would accept that . . . especially given the close association to the government. It is one thing for an individual to lose money, a totally different kettle of fish when a government is involved.

At the end of the day I hope Thaksin gets a bloody nose for this - - - thieving from beginning to end.

[Barney_the_Dinosaur]

If Temasek ponied up stooge Thai nominees (shills), that is illegal.

I.e 'Kularb Kaew' in this instance.

[Old Man River]

From this side Temasek Holdings is already looking at the case very carfully and in the early stages of planning their steps.

They did nonthing illegal and if the government voids the value of Shin's shares then I doubt Temasek would accept that . . . especially given the close association to the government. It is one thing for an individual to lose money, a totally different kettle of fish when a government is involved.

At the end of the day I hope Thaksin gets a bloody nose for this - - - thieving from beginning to end.

Sing Sling, while right on target, I fear the CNS is trying to find a way to appease the populace while not upsetting Temasek. It is a fine line, because anything short of what you state and Thailand will have damaged itself beyond repair for several years. Foreign direct investment (long term investment) has been coming to Thailand from Asian countries. Screw over the government of one of the more powerful Asian countries and see who the winner ultimately is (can you spell Malaysia?). It is unfortunate how many people in Thailand, caught up in the thrill of revenge, are losing sight of this.

[Tony Clifton]

From this side Temasek Holdings is already looking at the case very carfully and in the early stages of planning their steps.

They did nonthing illegal and if the government voids the value of Shin's shares then I doubt Temasek would accept that . . . especially given the close association to the government. It is one thing for an individual to lose money, a totally different kettle of fish when a government is involved.

At the end of the day I hope Thaksin gets a bloody nose for this - - - thieving from beginning to end.

Sneak preview.

[Barney_the_Dinosaur]

The Thai Courts won't be permitted to futz up this deal. It would mean that Thailand would be off the radar screen for foreign investors for years to come. Nobody wants that to happen.

[Tony Clifton]

Au contraire. I think it will show foreign inverstors that it's clean up time BIG time. You can expect these panels to be permanent. Corruption has been the one main thing often slowing things down or even making business impossible. Look at what companies have to go through when importing machinery or technology, big bribes have to be paid or/and miles of red tape awaiting them.

The days of mafia style politics are over.

On another note:

Coup is a setback for country and democracy : Singapore

Singapore--Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said Friday that the power seizure on 19 September was "a setback for Thailand" and its democracy.

He said Thailand lacks firmly established democratic institutions and a tradition of civilian rule.

Isn't his wife involved with Temasek?

[womble]

Au contraire. I think it will show foreign inverstors that it's clean up time BIG time. You can expect these panels to be permanent. Corruption has been the one main thing often slowing things down or even making business impossible. Look at what companies have to go through when importing machinery or technology, big bribes have to be paid or/and miles of red tape awaiting them.

The days of mafia style politics are over.

On another note:

Coup is a setback for country and democracy : Singapore

Singapore--Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said Friday that the power seizure on 19 September was "a setback for Thailand" and its democracy.

He said Thailand lacks firmly established democratic institutions and a tradition of civilian rule.

Isn't his wife involved with Temasek?

NO.......

The only thing that would show foreign investors is where to not put your money. No foriegn investors will look at this as a good thing.

We all know this place needs cleaning up, but a clean up is the worst thing from a foreign investors point of view.

If there is to be a clean up, the best thing from an investors point of view is they look at the concessions and national security thing, not simply the foreign ownership, nominee situation.

[Tony Clifton]

I wonder how much money foreign companies already established here had to fork out in bribes on a yearly basis? How many of them were ready or close to packing up and move to neighbouring countries?

I still think the BIG CLEANUP will attract more foreign investors, unlike the previous government's abuse of the words "foreign investor confidence", what a joke that was. The Shin deal should not be compared to those.

Edited October 6, 2006 by Tony Clifton