Is SC coercing messengers of news to save culprit?
Dedicating James Taylor's "You've Got A Friend" to a affected journalists
The ultimate from Rocky Bru here reported commercial operation publisher being hold up by Securities Commission for interrogation.
The grapevine from a strange seeking building during Mont Kiara is saying a inquire lasted as long as 8 hours. Yes, I repeat again. BK Siddhu of The Star or Azlan Abu Bakar of Business Times was interrogated for 8 hours!
They had been following as well as reporting a Kenmark debacle in their papers. Kenmark is a open listed seat association which was reprimanded by Bursa for late acquiescence of their quarterly report.
Then strangely, it's Taiwanese MD, John Hwang disappeared causing share prices to crash upon May 31st. If a emanate is about Directors' fiduciary avocation liek Sime Darby (resign please Tun Musa Hitam), there is an additional turn to it.
Few vital shareholders, namely Dato Ishak Ismail as well as Taiwanese Chen Wen-Ling was reported to have sold their shares in a open marketplace as well as cease to be vital shareholders. This happened before EON Bank sealed their Klang factory, to illustrate turning Kenmark into a PN17 company.
Securities Commission (SC) obtained an exparte claim upon Ishak Ismail - a marketplace rigger, as well as Anwar's financier as well as associate from a marketplace go-go days of a nineties - from getting a palm upon his share sales proceed.
By a demeanour of it, it is transparent who have been a probable law offenders as well as suspects. But since is SC being tough upon a messengers of news?
Isn't it strange?
They were never tough upon most past offenders of Securities law as well as even hold behind review upon couple of tall form cases. There is a likelihood which they will not be tough upon repeat offender, Ishak Ismail as well as a Taiwanese.
Isn't it strange which DAP is not making as most noises as a death of a partner to DAP Assembly! men, a l ate Teoh Beng Hock? PKR is quiet as a stutter cat given Ishak is a associate of Anwar.
PAS is as ease as a fire upon a illuminated candle in a church. Too reticent to understand.
Neither have been we conference Mr Goblok-isation, Khairy raising any hue as well as cry over a inapt rough diagnosis of commercial operation publisher by Securities Commission upon a "messengers" as well as not a law-breaker in a Kenmark debacle.
Ah ... here is an additional obscure contract renovation by Najib. How my mental recall unsuccessful me. Isn't a SC Chairperson, Tan Sri Zarinah Anwar a chairman which was in cahoot as well as in jeopardy by Khairy in a ECM Libra's rape of Avenue Capital?
Zarinah's family by her sister is a close family friend of Tun Abdullah. She wouldn't dare interrogate Khairy, with Tun Abdullah being a chairman who allocated her, would she?
Immediately after a Avenue Capital EGM which approved a takeover by ECM Libra, Zarinah lonesome them up by usually referring to Iris Corporation for committing incorrectness in a writings a next day. Macam betul saja.
Zarinah's inconsistencies was not limited to just ECM Libra takeover of Avenue. Read Bigdog here. He's researched quite a few.
Financial journalism underneath Securities Act
Despite a mainstream newspapers "assisting" SC to cover their insufficiency as well as incorrectness underneath stratagem of open relation, SC treated these commercial operation reporters really bad as well as all MSM journal should boycott as well as blackout SC in protest.
There is no basement for SC to theme a publisher for such long as well as suspiciously abusive interrogation. They have been merely reporting a eventuality as well as have been not suspected offenders.
Other than a protected deputy of protected handling companies to traffic as well as advise upon securities, a Securities Industry Act (copy in my receive is a 1990 version) authorised monetary report! ers of p rotected journal to write upon securities together with open listed companies.
It means monetary publisher have been not committing any bootleg act underneath a SIA for reporting upon a open listed company.
In a old Act of 1983, a management (in this box Securities Commission) could ask journal publishers for a name as well as residence of monetary journalist.
This can be understood to mean SC is empowered to examine monetary publisher for any offenses such as collaborating to supply marketplace or insider trade in their reporting.
But this is merely reporting past eventuality as well as no share letter of reference is made, directly or indirectly?
Insidious SC
The murmurs amongst friends amongst publisher is which SC is coercing a pronounced reporters to exhibit their source of report upon Ishak's share trading. This is highly crude since journalism ethics direct privacy of their source.
It is very unfavour becasue publisher will remove their integrity as well as repute if they revealed any sources. Their sources will not certitude them to exhibit report as well as leads. SC's action is as good as denying them of their rice bowl.
It is a good misapplication since a publisher will have no option but to face teh consequences of refusing to exhibit their sources.
The obscure emanate here is: Why did SC resorted to coerce a publisher for information?
Unless there is an intention to obstruct courtesy or save a suspects as well as culprit, there is no reason to be tough upon a journalists. after all, they have been usually third party source of information. SC can easily get a report from within a system as well as directly during a source.
Information upon all shares traded is available in records in a Bursa's as well as stockbroking system. These days there have been no some-more nominee companies versus a identity of buyers as well as sellers. All have to be divulge. When Ishak use! d to hav e alternative chairman as front, he could be detected.
Are a immature pretend-to-know-all wannabees of a monetary market, with their sophisticated equipments as well as some-more transparent confidence law, admitting to us ole timer which they can't examine Ishak?
The guess again is SC wants to coverup a culprit. By going after journalist, they have been scaring them from reporting a news. Any courtesy upon a publisher being investigated will diver courtesy from review upon a tangible culprit.
Eh ... shame la Khairy a "Goblok"-isation generation!
Letter & Opinion From Joe Public
The ultimate from Rocky Bru here reported commercial operation publisher being hold up by Securities Commission for interrogation.
The grapevine from a strange seeking building during Mont Kiara is saying a inquire lasted as long as 8 hours. Yes, I repeat again. BK Siddhu of The Star or Azlan Abu Bakar of Business Times was interrogated for 8 hours!
They had been following as well as reporting a Kenmark debacle in their papers. Kenmark is a open listed seat association which was reprimanded by Bursa for late acquiescence of their quarterly report.
Then strangely, it's Taiwanese MD, John Hwang disappeared causing share prices to crash upon May 31st. If a emanate is about Directors' fiduciary avocation liek Sime Darby (resign please Tun Musa Hitam), there is an additional turn to it.
Few vital shareholders, namely Dato Ishak Ismail as well as Taiwanese Chen Wen-Ling was reported to have sold their shares in a open marketplace as well as cease to be vital shareholders. This happened before EON Bank sealed their Klang factory, to illustrate turning Kenmark into a PN17 company.
Securities Commission (SC) obtained an exparte claim upon Ishak Ismail - a marketplace rigger, as well as Anwar's financier as well as associate from a marketplace go-go days of a nineties - from getting a palm upon his share sales proceed.
By a demeanour of it, it is transparent who have been a probable law offenders as well as suspects. But since is SC being tough upon a messengers of news?
Isn't it strange?
They were never tough upon most past offenders of Securities law as well as even hold behind review upon couple of tall form cases. There is a likelihood which they will not be tough upon repeat offender, Ishak Ismail as well as a Taiwanese.
Isn't it strange which DAP is not making as most noises as a death of a partner to DAP Assembly! men, a l ate Teoh Beng Hock? PKR is quiet as a stutter cat given Ishak is a associate of Anwar.
PAS is as ease as a fire upon a illuminated candle in a church. Too reticent to understand.
Neither have been we conference Mr Goblok-isation, Khairy raising any hue as well as cry over a inapt rough diagnosis of commercial operation publisher by Securities Commission upon a "messengers" as well as not a law-breaker in a Kenmark debacle.
Ah ... here is an additional obscure contract renovation by Najib. How my mental recall unsuccessful me. Isn't a SC Chairperson, Tan Sri Zarinah Anwar a chairman which was in cahoot as well as in jeopardy by Khairy in a ECM Libra's rape of Avenue Capital?
Zarinah's family by her sister is a close family friend of Tun Abdullah. She wouldn't dare interrogate Khairy, with Tun Abdullah being a chairman who allocated her, would she?
Immediately after a Avenue Capital EGM which approved a takeover by ECM Libra, Zarinah lonesome them up by usually referring to Iris Corporation for committing incorrectness in a writings a next day. Macam betul saja.
Zarinah's inconsistencies was not limited to just ECM Libra takeover of Avenue. Read Bigdog here. He's researched quite a few.
Financial journalism underneath Securities Act
Despite a mainstream newspapers "assisting" SC to cover their insufficiency as well as incorrectness underneath stratagem of open relation, SC treated these commercial operation reporters really bad as well as all MSM journal should boycott as well as blackout SC in protest.
There is no basement for SC to theme a publisher for such long as well as suspiciously abusive interrogation. They have been merely reporting a eventuality as well as have been not suspected offenders.
Other than a protected deputy of protected handling companies to traffic as well as advise upon securities, a Securities Industry Act (copy in my receive is a 1990 version) authorised monetary report! ers of p rotected journal to write upon securities together with open listed companies.
It means monetary publisher have been not committing any bootleg act underneath a SIA for reporting upon a open listed company.
In a old Act of 1983, a management (in this box Securities Commission) could ask journal publishers for a name as well as residence of monetary journalist.
This can be understood to mean SC is empowered to examine monetary publisher for any offenses such as collaborating to supply marketplace or insider trade in their reporting.
But this is merely reporting past eventuality as well as no share letter of reference is made, directly or indirectly?
Insidious SC
The murmurs amongst friends amongst publisher is which SC is coercing a pronounced reporters to exhibit their source of report upon Ishak's share trading. This is highly crude since journalism ethics direct privacy of their source.
It is very unfavour becasue publisher will remove their integrity as well as repute if they revealed any sources. Their sources will not certitude them to exhibit report as well as leads. SC's action is as good as denying them of their rice bowl.
It is a good misapplication since a publisher will have no option but to face teh consequences of refusing to exhibit their sources.
The obscure emanate here is: Why did SC resorted to coerce a publisher for information?
Unless there is an intention to obstruct courtesy or save a suspects as well as culprit, there is no reason to be tough upon a journalists. after all, they have been usually third party source of information. SC can easily get a report from within a system as well as directly during a source.
Information upon all shares traded is available in records in a Bursa's as well as stockbroking system. These days there have been no some-more nominee companies versus a identity of buyers as well as sellers. All have to be divulge. When Ishak use! d to hav e alternative chairman as front, he could be detected.
Are a immature pretend-to-know-all wannabees of a monetary market, with their sophisticated equipments as well as some-more transparent confidence law, admitting to us ole timer which they can't examine Ishak?
The guess again is SC wants to coverup a culprit. By going after journalist, they have been scaring them from reporting a news. Any courtesy upon a publisher being investigated will diver courtesy from review upon a tangible culprit.
Eh ... shame la Khairy a "Goblok"-isation generation!
Letter & Opinion From Joe Public
Comments