View Full Version : Soh Chee Wen's court case begins Nov 18
15-11-2002, 07:03 AM
<FONT SIZE="+1">SC seeks 6 witnesses for Soh Chee Wen trial</FONT>
By Joseph Chin
The Securities Commission (SC) is seeking six individuals to appear as witnesses in the trial of businessman Datuk Soh Chee Wen, which will be held from Nov 18 to 29 at the Shah Alam Sessions Court.
The SC said in a statement on Nov 14 that the six were Yeo Lee Hoe (NRIC No. 531212-10-5473); Edwin Tay Hung Ky (NRIC No. 671128-01-5859); Tay Siew Lin, Michelle (NRIC No. 710507-10-6020); Tay Hung Kiat, Richard (NRIC No. 731006-10-5073); Surendran a/l Palachandran (NRIC No. A0572707); and Ng Siek Sen (NRIC No. 581026-10-5635).
The SC said those who knew of their whereabouts to contact the SC at 03-62048452, 03-62048198 or 03-62048144.
Soh, 43, was arrested on May 14 and charged with two counts under Section 87A(a) of the Securities Industry Act 1983 of defrauding Omega Securities Sdn Bhd.
He pleaded innocent to both charges and was released on bail of RM2 million with two sureties, while his passport and travel documents were surrendered to the court.
Soh paid the bail. The sureties were former Uniphoenix Corporation Bhd executive chairman Tan Sri Mohamed Ngah Said and former director Datuk Phillip Ho Seng Chuan.
The conviction under Section 87A(a) carries a penalty of a minimum fine of RM1 million and a maximum jail term of 10 years. Trial dates have been fixed on Nov 18 to 29, Jan 7 to 15, and Jan 20 to 30.
Soh is alleged to have defrauded Omega Securities between Sept 2, 1997 and Jan 2, 1998 via contango transactions that led to Omega Securities to have insufficient collateral in financing specific margin accounts.
The transactions caused the withdrawal of sales proceeds amounting to RM95.97 million from the accounts when the margin equity level was below 150 per cent, thereby contravening KLSE rules for trading by member companies.
Soh is also alleged to have defrauded Omega Securities from Sept 2, 1997 to Jan 12, 1998 via direct business transactions or "crossings" of 35.56 million Uniphoenix shares in specific margin accounts without any change in beneficial ownership. The crossings caused the withdrawal of RM424.93 million when the margin equity was below 150 per cent.
15-11-2002, 07:08 AM
<FONT SIZE="+1">Related threads in the Web Forum:
<a href="http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2733">John Soh, will you 'sing-a-Ling'?</a>
<a href="http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2732">Will John Soh shut-up if Dr M says so?</a>
<a href="http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2731">Soh Chee Wen & something interesting in Subang Jaya</a></font>
16-11-2002, 06:25 AM
The trial will be held from November 18 to 29,
January 7 to 15, and January 20 to 30.
16-11-2002, 12:57 PM
THE MALAY MAIL
Saturday, November 16, 2002
<font size="+1">It's 'ON' on Monday</font>
...A legal source said the case will go ahead as scheduled.
The Shah Alam High Court had fixed Monday for the trial and has set aside 10 days.
"Soh's counsel is likely to start the case. He is likely to raise preliminary applications and objections to the case and the charges," said the source.
Soh will be represented by former DPP Francis Ng Aik Guan.
The SC is represented by a team of four prosecutors headed by Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil. The others are DPP Salehuddin Saidin, DPP Ahmad Fairus Zainol Abidin and Public Prosecutor Roz Mawar Rozain.
...Another source said they were surprised that the SC was unable to contact the witnesses.
"They have ample time after charging Soh in May to look for them. Why did they issue a statement at the eleventh hour to look for them?"
The source, who has apparently spoken to one of the Tay siblings, told The Malay Mail that all three sought are still in Malaysia.
"They were surprised to see their pictures in the newspapers yesterday."
The source said the siblings are reachable by telephone and the address the SC gave to the media is their mother's home.
"They were puzzled why the SC failed to contact them at the address."
18-11-2002, 10:25 PM
Monday, Nov 18, 2002, 4.22pm
<FONT SIZE="+1">Soh asks for specific documents to prepare for trial</FONT>
By Thomas Soon
Businessman Datuk Soh Chee Wen has asked the court to compel the relevant authorities, including the Securities Commission, to provide specific documents for his examination and inspection before he stands trial for two counts of alleged fraud.
His applications were made to the Sessions Court to summon Securities Commission investigating officer Liew Chee Hing to present specific documents that are “necessary or desirable” for the purpose of his trial.
Soh’s counsel Francis Ng Aik Guan told Session judge Suraya Othman that his client could not make an effective preparation for the trial unless he specifically inspects 11 categories of documents that were vital for his defence.
“This is a very complex case. We have been told that there are enough documents to fill a room and the prosecution has more than 300 prospective witnesses. Here, all we have are the charge sheets and the search list,” he said.
Submissions on Soh’s applications continue on Nov 20.
18-11-2002, 10:27 PM
<img src="http://www.mggpillai.com/themes/W4/images/mggv.gif" align="left"> <font size="+2"><a href="http://www.mggpillai.com"target="new">www.mggpillai.com</a></font>
11-11-2002 12:58 pm
<font size="+1"><a href="http://www.mggpillai.com/article.php3?sid=1535"target="new">Is Dato' Seri Ling Liong Sik On His Way Out?</a></font>
... He won this battle to stay on and defeat his deputy, Dato' Seri
Lim Ah Lek. But he fell foul of Dr Mahathir over the teaching of
science and mathematics in English in Chinese schools. He
became expendable once more...
16-11-2002 11:58 am
<font size="+1"><a href="http://www.mggpillai.com/article.php3?sid=1539"target="new">Could the MCA President Survive The Soh Chee Wen Trial?</a></font>
... it is a safe bet that Dr Ling cannot lead his party into to the
next general election; and a safe bet to say he would not be in
the cabinet this time next year...
Visit the <a href="http://www.usj.com.my/bulletin/upload/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2953">Warung Politik</a> channel in this Forum
21-11-2002, 07:41 AM
NEW STRAITS TIMES
Wednesday, November 20, 2002
Soh wants prosecution to 'crystalise' wordings of charges
SHAH ALAM, Nov 20: Businessman Datuk Soh Chee Wen wants the prosecution in his share manipulation case to "crystalise" the definitions of the words "crossings" and "contango" in the two charges against him so that he could prepare his defence. His lawyer Francis Ng Aik Guan in his application before Sessions Court judge Suraya Othman for the exact meaning of the words to be provided said, he was faced with so many definitions of the words which were conflicting as well.
Which one of the definitions is the prosecution alleging my client of committing, he said, referring to the many definitions of contango transaction which he came across in the web-sites of Oxford University Press, Credit Suisse Financial Glossary, Investopedia and RZB.
Ng who was continuing his submission from Monday said the only definition he found of the word crossings which was used in the first charge against Soh was found in a newspaper.
He said Soh had in his affidavit to support the application had stated that he (Soh) was confused with the exact meaning of the two words as intended by the prosecution when framing the charges against him.
Soh also wanted the prosecution to particularise the charges against him by giving him further details as to the manner of how he was allegedly be directly involved in the purchase of 35,563,000 units of Uniphoenix Corpration Bhd shares and directly involved in the selling of securities through margin accounts at Omega Securities Sdn Bhd.
Ng said with the complexity of the charges against Soh, further particulars should be provided saying that he should not be left guessing.
He appleid to the court to order the prosecution to provide the complete and further particulars either in separate list or memorandum from the charges if they were lengthy or via ammendments to the charges.
Before adjournment, Suraya allowed Soh's application for notes of proceedings from two related previous cases involving stock broker Datuk Tony Tiah Thee Kian and TA Enterprise Bhd general manager Kimmy Khoo from a different Sessions Court to be provided to him.
Tiah had pleaded guilty to abetting Soh and was fined RM3 million in May while a charge against Khoo who allegedly abetted Tiah, was withdrwan.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil who was assisted by DPP Salehuddin Saidin and Ahmad Fairuz Zainal Abiden and Securities Commission prosecuting officers Ros Mawar Rozain and Azryain Borhan, will reply tomorrow.
21-11-2002, 06:39 PM
NEW STRAITS TIMES
Thursday, November 21, 2002
<font size="+1">Soh the cause of his own inconvenience</FONT>
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 21: The inconvenience faced by businessman Datuk Soh Chee Wen in understanding the charges against him and in recalling events relating to them was self inflicted, the prosecution submitted in the Sessions Court today.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil said the warrant of arrest against Soh was issued on April 15, 1999, but could only be executed upon his arrival at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport on May 14.
Thus, he said, Soh's application for the prosecution to provide him with several documents pertaining to the case, was trivial, troublesome, not bona fide and amounts to an abuse of court process.
"I have not come across any authority that can support the accused's reason of difficulties in understanding the charges as a ground for making the application.
"However, the important thing is he cannot use the fact that he cannot remember as a ground to support his application," he said.
Based on the documents required by Soh as listed in his application notice, Abdul Karim submitted that Soh had actually comprehanded the subject matter of the charges against him.
"The list of documents required by the accused is very comprehensive and they correspond exactly to the subject matter of the charges against him.
"Only those who are expert in share transaction would be able to state what exactly they want," he said.
Abdul Karim was replying to submissions by Soh's counsel Francis Ng Aik Guan in his application for certain documents and further and better particulars to be supplied to him to enable him to prepare a proper defence.
...Abdul Karim also submitted that the charges against Soh were not defective for they had all the particulars required under the law.
Hearing before judge Suraya Othman continues on Tuesday.
27-11-2002, 08:06 PM
NEW STRAITS TIMES
Nov 27, 5:36pm
<FONT SIZE="+1">Soh to know pre-trial application bid on Jan 7</FONT>
SHAH ALAM, Nov 27: The Sessions Court will deliver on Jan 7 its decision on businessman Datuk Soh Chee Wen's pre-trial application for certain documents and particulars to be supplied to him to enable his counsel to prepare his defence.
Judge Suraya Othman fixed the date after considering that the trial has been fixed for hearing beginning Jan 7.
Suraya also instructed the prosecution to ensure that its witnesses who have been subpoenaed are present in court on that day.
Hearing has been fixed for almost one month in January _ Jan 7 to 10, Jan 13 to 15, Jan 20 to 24 and Jan 27 to 30.
08-01-2003, 09:25 PM
Wednesday, January 08, 2003
<FONT SIZE="+1">Court grants Soh access to two categories of documents</FONT>
By LOONG MENG YEE
SHAH ALAM: Businessman Datuk Soh Chee Wen has been granted access to two out of the 11 categories of documents taken by the Securities Commission in the course of an investigation against him for two counts of alleged fraud involving different shares.
Sessions judge Suraya Othman yesterday allowed for the two categories of documents as they were specified or referred to in the charges.
She also directed the prosecution to define the meaning of “contango transaction” to give Soh notice of the alleged offence committed.
The judge said the definition was needed because the term was not listed as an official legal definition in the Securities Industry Act 1983 and the Kuala Lumpur Stock Exchange Rules.
Suraya also ordered the prosecution to make available the documents before trial to avoid postponement, adding that the prosecution could choose whether to do so in the form of a list/memorandum or amendments to the charges.
The court disallowed access to the other nine categories of documents on grounds that they were evidentiary documents, vague, ambiguous, too embracing, or not specified or referred to in the charges.
She added that certain categories of documents, which Soh could not have access to at this stage, could be given after the prosecution’s case begins when the issue of their relevancy was determined.
The two categories of documents, as specified under Soh’s pre-trial application, are contract notes and other form of securities which showed the alleged purchase of 35,563,000 units of Uniphoenix Corporation Bhd shares and the sale of securities through margin accounts in the now-defunct Omega Securities Sdn Bhd; and account opening applications of the accounts appendixed to the two charges against him.
08-01-2003, 09:26 PM
THE MALAY MAIL
Wednesday, January 8, 2003
<font size="+1">Soh to subpoena Ling, son as witnesses</font>
“I have instructed my lawyers to subpoena Dr Ling and his family as my witnesses,” Soh told The Malay Mail.
He said his lawyers are processing the applications for the subpoenas from the Shah Alam Sessions court.
Soh said the witnesses will be called to his hearing once the trial proceeds.
Soh said this after the court allowed him to inspect two categories of documents that had been withheld by the Securities Commission (SC), ahead of the hearing of the alleged shares fraud case, yesterday.
“They are important figures in my trial. Their evidence will help,” he said.
Soh is expected to subpoena Dr Ling, his son Hee Leong and daughter-in-law Carol Ong Lee Choo as his witnesses.
Soh and Hee Leong were once business partners.
Soh was also once an ally of MCA president Dr Ling, but the relationship soured after he filed a RM149-million lawsuit against Hee Leong and Ong.
Soh is facing trial on two charges of allegedly defrauding the now defunct brokerage firm Omega Securities Sdn Bhd under Section 87A(a) of the Securities Industry Act 1983.
12-01-2003, 09:29 AM
<font size="+1">Summary of the court proceedings...
Defence: Justice hurried is justice buried
Prosecution: Justice delayed is justice denied</font>
Daily Edge Exclusives
Soh's counsel says:
<font size="+2">"Justice hurried is justice buried"</font>
By Thomas Soon
Businessman Datuk Soh Chee Wen has asked for a stay of trial proceedings pending the disposal of an appeal to the High Court on a Sessions Court's decision pertaining to his applications for inspection of documents and particulars from the prosecution.
Soh's counsel Ng Aik Guan urged the Sessions Court, which will be hearing the cases against him, not to hurry onto trial, as under the current circumstances, "justice hurried is justice buried".
The prosecution and accused have filed their notices of appeal to the High Court against part of the decisions of Sessions Court judge Suraya Othman, who on Jan 7 ordered the prosecution to supply the accused two out of 11 categories of documents he applied for.
The Sessions Court also allowed Soh's application for the prosecution to furnish further and complete particulars relating to contango transactions, specifically directing the prosecution to come up with a definition of "contango".
At the proceedings on Jan 10, both parties told the court that they had filed their respective notices of appeal, the defence on the day the decisions were made, while the prosecution filed the notice two days later.
Ng submitted to the court that a stay of proceedings ought to be granted, otherwise his client might be highly prejudiced in the event that the High Court agreed with the defence on appeal and that may result in a mistrial if trial proceedings went ahead.
The counsel argued that non-production of documents was more detrimental than the case of a positive decision on the supply of documents. "Without them, the accused cannot adequately prepare his defence and advise his counsel."
Before the case was adjourned, prosecuting officer Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil told the court that he would submit when proceedings resumed on Jan 13 that a pre-trial decision pending appeal was not a ground for a stay of proceedings.
* * *
Daily Edge Exclusives
Soh's prosecutors say:
<font size="+2">"Justice delayed is justice denied"</font>
Datuk Soh Chee Wen’s prosecutors have proposed to supply all relevant documents pertaining to the two counts of fraud allegations against him, but the offer was turned down by the accused on grounds of being “vague.”
Deputy public prosecutor Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil told the Sessions Court judge Suraya Othman that the prosecution was prepared to supply the documents for Soh’s inspections and copying if required.
“As advised (in Suraya’s decision on Jan 7), we are willing to do so in order to expedite the case so that there is no unnecessary delay. Justice delayed is justice denied. The case has already taken three years and it has been too long,” he told on the court on Jan 10.
...Abdul Karim proposed that the defence could ask for any relevant document at the time when prosecution witnesses are giving evidence, apart from the categories of documents that had been ordered to be supplied to Soh by the court.
...the prosecution, via deputy public prosecutor Salehuddin Zaidin, seemingly made an unprecedented move urging the court to make a ruling on the matter, which was also rejected by the court.
“It is a private proposal between the prosecution and the defence. I am only a referee. I cannot take sides in this matter. This has never been done before and unprecedented,” said Suraya, adding that she could not stop the defence from making an application.
“The prosecution cannot ask the court to force the defence to accept it (the proposal),” she said. “It would not be fair and not appropriate for me to do so.”
However, the prosecution clarified that it was not a request for the court to make a ruling, but that the court should take the proposal as a factor to be considered in the defence’s application to stay proceedings, to which Ng also objected.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.12 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.