November 23, 2009
The Nation
Prosecution reveals how the Shinawatras hid and multiplied their assets while in power
Would you cheat your son out of Bt3 billion? That could happen if your assistant was in a hurry to cover up something very important to you.
That was what the prosecution in the Bt76-billion asset seizure case against ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra told the Supreme Court last week.
The story was part of the prosecution's detailed argument that Thaksin and his ex-wife, Pojaman na Pombejra, did own altogether 46.87 per cent of Shin Corp shares worth more than Bt69 billion while the former held the country's highest office from 2001-2006.
The alleged cover-up of massive wealth was in blatant violation of Article 100(3) of the National Counter-Corruption Commission Act of 1999, which bars public office holders and their spouses from owning shares in companies holding state concessions.
In this case, Shin Corp was the holding company for Advanced Info Service (AIS) and Shin Satellite, which enjoyed government concessions for lucrative cellular and satellite service businesses.
Back in 2000, Thaksin and Pojaman were busy preparing to hide their multibillion-baht assets ahead of the general election.
After winning the election by a landslide, they could have sold off the assets or put them under a "blind" trust to comply with the law, but these options were never used.
Instead, a highly complex web of offshore and onshore entities and nominees was used to conceal their tremendous wealth.
Behind the scenes, the motives were multifaceted, ranging from tax avoidance to election campaign financing and other political reasons.
The entire process of concealing such massive wealth was unprecedented in Thai history. So was the subsequent government policies and measures used to increase the value of the holdings over a period of more than five years.
Kaewsan Atibhodi, a member of the now-defunct Assets Examination Committee, which investigated this and other Thaksin cases, said the overall process of asset concealment and "policy corruption" was just intriguing.
As a key prosecution witness in the Bt76-billion asset seizure case pending in the Supreme Court, Kaewsan last week testified that the whole Bt76 billion fortune should be devolved to the state.
"First of all, Thaksin hid his vast shareholdings even after being elected the prime minister, so he intentionally violated Article 100(3) of the NCCC law.
"Secondly, as prime minister, he introduced measures and policies that benefited Shin Corp so he violated Article 100(1) of the NCCC law.
"Therefore, Thaksin abused his office to gain his wealth, resulting in a loss to the state of more than Bt100 billion. Since he and his former wife controlled as much as 46.87 per cent of Shin Corp, the benefits from such a large shareholding were therefore ill-gotten and should be forfeited."
Yet, the prosecution would have to convince the court that Thaksin and Pojaman did really conceal their wealth while the former was in office - a key point consistently countered and dismissed by the defence lawyers.
Given that the burden of proof rests with the accused in corruption and related cases, the prosecution concluded that they were not satisfied with evidence presented by the defence, which argued that all Shin Corp shares were "sold" to the couple's children and relatives before Thaksin assumed the premiership.
"This argument was not convincing because the documentation, such as notices of share transfers, promissory notes, annual reports of Ample Rich Co (one of the offshore nominees) could have been tampered with or backdated to alter the whole story," Kaewsan said.
"However, we're not given any hard evidence that couldn't be meddled with, such as share depositories or transaction records that Thaksin could have asked from UBS Bank (Singapore branch) to prove that his son, Panthongtae, was the authorised owner of those shares, not just his father's nominee."
Pojaman testified before the court that Panthongtae earlier paid her Bt4.5 billion in promissory notes for a total of 450 million shares of TMB Bank that were sold to her son.
Her testimony raised even more questions than answers on the contentious point of whether the son and other Shinawatra children as well as relatives were genuine buyers of Thaksin and Pojaman's shares or just their nominees.
The facts show that if the Bt4.5 billion payment by Panthongtae to her mother for the TMB shares was real as claimed by Pojaman, the mother would have probably conned her son out of as much as Bt3 billion in just one go.
Why? The entire 450 million shares of TMB Bank as cited by Pojaman included 300 million shares that Pojaman got for free via the exercise of 300 million warrants, so the actual cost of all 450 million TMB shares was just Bt1.5 billion, not the hugely-inflated Bt4.5 billion.
Any decent mother wouldn't have done this to her beloved children. In other words, it simply defies conventional wisdom.
So what could have happened? Besides Pojaman's aides, who prepared the document for court evidence, no one else would have a clear idea of what went wrong, but the glitch clearly undermines the defence's credibility as far as true ownership of all of the Thaksin-Pojaman assets is concerned.
In fact, this is one of the most fundamental points in the prosecution's argument for taking permanent possession of the Bt76 billion.
The prosecution firmly believes that Thaksin covered up his wealth illegally and then launched policies and measures that enormously benefited his financial interests over his years in office before selling those assets to Temasek Holding of Singapore at a huge gain in 2006.
Company above state
Five policies and measures that benefited Shin Corp:
- Reduction in the concession fee of AIS from 25 per cent to 20 per cent of its revenue, resulting in state-owned TOT losing Bt70 billion.
- Amending AIS's contracts with TOT and state-owned CAT to share roaming charges resulting in a combined loss of Bt21.7 billion for the state.
- Enacting legislation to convert concession fees into excise tax on telecom services in bid to keep AIS's market lead at the expense of competitors.
- Approving Shin Sat's IP Star satellite project so that it did not have to put into orbit a Bt4-billion Thaicom 4 satellite, resulting in a Bt20-billion loss in state benefits.
- Approving a Bt1-billion increase in Exim Bank loan for Burma from Bt3 billion to Bt4 billion, so the extra Bt1 billion could be used to buy satellite services from Shin Sat.
Would you cheat your son out of Bt3 billion? That could happen if your assistant was in a hurry to cover up something very important to you.
That was what the prosecution in the Bt76-billion asset seizure case against ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra told the Supreme Court last week.
The story was part of the prosecution's detailed argument that Thaksin and his ex-wife, Pojaman na Pombejra, did own altogether 46.87 per cent of Shin Corp shares worth more than Bt69 billion while the former held the country's highest office from 2001-2006.
The alleged cover-up of massive wealth was in blatant violation of Article 100(3) of the National Counter-Corruption Commission Act of 1999, which bars public office holders and their spouses from owning shares in companies holding state concessions.
In this case, Shin Corp was the holding company for Advanced Info Service (AIS) and Shin Satellite, which enjoyed government concessions for lucrative cellular and satellite service businesses.
Back in 2000, Thaksin and Pojaman were busy preparing to hide their multibillion-baht assets ahead of the general election.
After winning the election by a landslide, they could have sold off the assets or put them under a "blind" trust to comply with the law, but these options were never used.
Instead, a highly complex web of offshore and onshore entities and nominees was used to conceal their tremendous wealth.
Behind the scenes, the motives were multifaceted, ranging from tax avoidance to election campaign financing and other political reasons.
The entire process of concealing such massive wealth was unprecedented in Thai history. So was the subsequent government policies and measures used to increase the value of the holdings over a period of more than five years.
Kaewsan Atibhodi, a member of the now-defunct Assets Examination Committee, which investigated this and other Thaksin cases, said the overall process of asset concealment and "policy corruption" was just intriguing.
As a key prosecution witness in the Bt76-billion asset seizure case pending in the Supreme Court, Kaewsan last week testified that the whole Bt76 billion fortune should be devolved to the state.
"First of all, Thaksin hid his vast shareholdings even after being elected the prime minister, so he intentionally violated Article 100(3) of the NCCC law.
"Secondly, as prime minister, he introduced measures and policies that benefited Shin Corp so he violated Article 100(1) of the NCCC law.
"Therefore, Thaksin abused his office to gain his wealth, resulting in a loss to the state of more than Bt100 billion. Since he and his former wife controlled as much as 46.87 per cent of Shin Corp, the benefits from such a large shareholding were therefore ill-gotten and should be forfeited."
Yet, the prosecution would have to convince the court that Thaksin and Pojaman did really conceal their wealth while the former was in office - a key point consistently countered and dismissed by the defence lawyers.
Given that the burden of proof rests with the accused in corruption and related cases, the prosecution concluded that they were not satisfied with evidence presented by the defence, which argued that all Shin Corp shares were "sold" to the couple's children and relatives before Thaksin assumed the premiership.
"This argument was not convincing because the documentation, such as notices of share transfers, promissory notes, annual reports of Ample Rich Co (one of the offshore nominees) could have been tampered with or backdated to alter the whole story," Kaewsan said.
"However, we're not given any hard evidence that couldn't be meddled with, such as share depositories or transaction records that Thaksin could have asked from UBS Bank (Singapore branch) to prove that his son, Panthongtae, was the authorised owner of those shares, not just his father's nominee."
Pojaman testified before the court that Panthongtae earlier paid her Bt4.5 billion in promissory notes for a total of 450 million shares of TMB Bank that were sold to her son.
Her testimony raised even more questions than answers on the contentious point of whether the son and other Shinawatra children as well as relatives were genuine buyers of Thaksin and Pojaman's shares or just their nominees.
The facts show that if the Bt4.5 billion payment by Panthongtae to her mother for the TMB shares was real as claimed by Pojaman, the mother would have probably conned her son out of as much as Bt3 billion in just one go.
Why? The entire 450 million shares of TMB Bank as cited by Pojaman included 300 million shares that Pojaman got for free via the exercise of 300 million warrants, so the actual cost of all 450 million TMB shares was just Bt1.5 billion, not the hugely-inflated Bt4.5 billion.
Any decent mother wouldn't have done this to her beloved children. In other words, it simply defies conventional wisdom.
So what could have happened? Besides Pojaman's aides, who prepared the document for court evidence, no one else would have a clear idea of what went wrong, but the glitch clearly undermines the defence's credibility as far as true ownership of all of the Thaksin-Pojaman assets is concerned.
In fact, this is one of the most fundamental points in the prosecution's argument for taking permanent possession of the Bt76 billion.
The prosecution firmly believes that Thaksin covered up his wealth illegally and then launched policies and measures that enormously benefited his financial interests over his years in office before selling those assets to Temasek Holding of Singapore at a huge gain in 2006.
Company above state
Five policies and measures that benefited Shin Corp:
- Reduction in the concession fee of AIS from 25 per cent to 20 per cent of its revenue, resulting in state-owned TOT losing Bt70 billion.
- Amending AIS's contracts with TOT and state-owned CAT to share roaming charges resulting in a combined loss of Bt21.7 billion for the state.
- Enacting legislation to convert concession fees into excise tax on telecom services in bid to keep AIS's market lead at the expense of competitors.
- Approving Shin Sat's IP Star satellite project so that it did not have to put into orbit a Bt4-billion Thaicom 4 satellite, resulting in a Bt20-billion loss in state benefits.
- Approving a Bt1-billion increase in Exim Bank loan for Burma from Bt3 billion to Bt4 billion, so the extra Bt1 billion could be used to buy satellite services from Shin Sat.
15 comments:
a thief always complement another thief. however, they are always on the look out that another thief might steal from them.
Old Phally Monkey, Cambodia Towk
Not to worry, KI Media. Hun Sen's turn will come.
Kuoy Pichet
If we look at Hun Sen. he has amassed since he got his power from 1979.
-All hotels left over from 1975.
-All factories buildings and lands along riverside from Km No 9 at road National 5 till the end of Norodom Bouldevard.
-All businesses owned by Kong Triv, Kok An, Ly Yong Phat, Year Phu, Yeay Phann, Sok Kong, Kith Meng, Tiger Beer etc..
-Tela Khmer
-Canadia bank.
-Many hotels in Siem Reap.
-Vast pieces of land in all Cambodian province.
-All TV stations
-Moneys in HK banks, Singapore Banks and Switziland,
-Rubbers planation,
A Good name is rather to be chosen
than great riches, and loving favour
rather than silver and gold.
A CPP ASS KISSER SOY SOPHEAP PHONE# 011-855-12819005
CALL HIM AND TELL HIM TO SHUT THE FUCK OFF!!
Yo! got your stinky breath out of me bitch..! hhmmm comon give me a kiss...!
A friend stupid is a friend indeed.
Dear KI team,
I would like to share a secret report about Border that Ke Kim Yan sent to Hun Xen. Please go through my blog: http://lg-media.blogspot.com/2009/11/border-report-expressed-vn-thieves.html
Please forward it to all Khmer you have known and bloggers.
Thanks
Thanks for sharing.
It'really secret that we've never seen before.
Folk, former cambodian army general Ke Kim Yan also said, Vietnam did encroaching inside our territory...
9:01 AM,
I will call ah jouy marai Soysauce Sopheat arch
In my heart I love TakSin' money than TakSin
In my heart I love his money than him (TakSin)
these two guy are one call them as ah kour kbal xaoy ning ah kour kbal jong eat.
Good fucking friend, Are we gain from him? Sale and lease more cambodian land for foreigner(vietman,china,korea)
Both of your life will end like him, on run,no place to stay, no passport to travel and dig(live) under vietman ass and shit.
Post a Comment