Details of the Egat verdict
The summary of the Supreme Administrative Court verdict on Egat privatisation:
- The State Enterprises Corporatisation Act prescribes for the privatisation process, empowering the Cabinet, the Corporatisation Committee, the Company-forming Committee and the Public Hearing Committee to take charge for each step of the preparations to transform the state capital into shares.- Upon the completion of the preparations by relevant authorities, two royal decrees are to be enacted to enforce the privatisation plan - one of which is to deal with the charter of the new company and another is to dissolve the state enterprise. - At the centre of litigation is whether the two royal decrees relating to the Egat privatisation have been lawfully enacted. - Relevant provisions relating to the Company-forming committee ban its members from having the conflict of interest. Upon examination of evidence, this court finds that Olarn Chaipravat, a committee member appointed on his expertise, has conflicts of interest with Egat. - Olarn sits on the board of Shin Corporation Plc, which holds the controlling stake on Advanced Info Service, an operator of telecommunication business while Egat runs a subsidiary, Egat Telecommunication Co, which operates a network of communication fiber optics. - He is also a board member of PTT Plc, a supplier of natural gas to Egat. - Under the State Administration Act, activities committed under the conflicts of interest are penalised by nullification. - Prinya Nutalai, vice minister for Natural Resources and Environment, chaired the Public Hearing Committee. This is unlawful because a political office holder is banned from conducting the public hearing. - Furthermore, the Public Hearing Committee failed to satisfy prescribed steps for publicise and solicit public opinions on the matter. - In regard to the royal decree relating to the charter of Egat Plc, its provisions are unlawful to transfer the assets and land of two power plants in Bang Pakong, deemed state property, to the private hands. - The company charter fails to limit the appropriation right which is strictly under the public jurisdiction, not a private entity. - It also provides a leeway for electrification that can lead to the infringement of private plots and assets under the loose supervision of a regulatory body, Electricity Production Committee. - As per the above findings, this court rules to cancel two royal degrees enacted in 2005, one on the charter of Egat Plc and another on the dissolution of state enterprise Egat.
|
