Temasick & Chao Tar Breaks Law But No Punishment Woh!

[makapaaa]

<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=452><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top width=452 colSpan=2>Published September 25, 2009

</TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top width=452 colSpan=2>Chartered issue: SIC sticks by its policy of silence

By JAMIE LEE
<TABLE class=storyLinks border=0 cellSpacing=4 cellPadding=1 width=136 align=right><TBODY><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right></TD><TD>Email this article</TD></TR><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right></TD><TD>Print article </TD></TR><TR class=font10><TD width=20 align=right></TD><TD>Feedback</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>(SINGAPORE) The Securities Industry Council (SIC) will not disclose its dealings with companies unless there is a breach of the Takeover Code and as part of a public sanction, it said yesterday.

This was in response to a BT commentary ('Why SIC should break its silence on Chartered episode', Sept 23) arguing that SIC should have commented on whether Chartered Semiconductor Manufacturing and parent company Temasek Holdings had to say if they were in talks with Advanced Technology Investment Company (ATIC).
BT had reported that ATIC had put out a bid to buy Chartered in late May, after the shares went up as much as 9 per cent in a sign that the market had caught wind of the potential sale.
Chartered said in response then that it had not received any bid from ATIC. There was no statement from Temasek.
Four months later, ATIC announced a $2.5 billion offer for Chartered, prompting questions of whether Chartered's statement and the silence from Temasek were adequate and if SIC should step in to comment.
But SIC said that it does not disclose its dealings with individual parties.
'Confidentiality plays an important part in SIC's administration of the takeover code,' it said in a letter to BT, adding that this non-disclosure would ensure that the involved parties are not prejudiced.
<SCRIPT language=javascript> <!-- // Check for Mac. var strAgent; var blnMac; strAgent = navigator.userAgent; strAgent.indexOf('Mac') > 0 ? blnMac = true:blnMac = false; if (blnMac == true) { document.write('
'); } //--> </SCRIPT><TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=4 width=300 align=right><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top align=middle>

<!-- AdSpace --><IFRAME height=250 marginHeight=0 src="http://ads.asia1.com.sg/html.ng/site=tbto&sec=btointhenews&cat1=bnews&cat2=btointhenewsart&size=300X250" frameBorder=0 width=300 marginWidth=0 scrolling=no bordercolor="#000000"><script language='JavaScript1.1' src='http://ads.asia1.com.sg/js.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&site=tbto&sec=btointhenews&cat1=bnews&cat2=btointhenewsart&size=300X250'></script><noscript></noscript></IFRAME><!-- /AdSpace-->

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>'Nonetheless, where there are breaches of the code and sanctions of a public nature are imposed, these will be announced,' it added, referring to its public censures involving Serial System Limited and Jade Technologies Holdings.
SIC did not say if it was consulted by Temasek or Chartered over this matter. It was also silent on whether there was any breach of the code by the companies.
BT also asked if SIC's silence - when compared to its public censure involving a smaller company Jade - may give the impression that bigger companies may escape censure.
'SIC applies the Takeover Code consistently to all relevant parties to a takeover or merger transaction without exception,' it said.
Mak Yuen Teen, co-director of the Corporate Governance and Financial Reporting Centre at the NUS Business School, asked if SIC's comment meant that it has privately 'reprimanded' the company. 'If nothing is said, how will companies and market players know what is acceptable and what is not?'
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[makapaaa]

Another nice example of the nature of the 'rule of law' in Peesai!