iTV case could lead to criminal charges
The government panel investigating iTV Plc's concession contract will question those believed to be responsible for an alleged change to the contract that was not approved by Cabinet.
More than 20 officials could be held liable for damages, said committee chairman Peeraphan Prempooti. "We are seeking civil, criminal, and disciplinary penalties against whoever is found responsible for the mishap," said Peeraphan, the acting permanent secretary of the PM's Office. After the committee's first meeting yesterday, Peeraphan said it would need an additional 30 days on top of the 30 it had been granted to complete its probe. The panel is investigating how Article 5 was allegedly inserted into paragraph 4 of iTV's concession contract, and to identify those responsible. The article allows iTV to seek compensation from the PM's Office if state agencies grant other parties the right to run a TV business that can broadcast commercials, or permit a pay-TV operator to run commercials, and these decisions damage iTV financially. The broadcaster used this article to seek compensation from the PM's Office in 1999. The case went to an arbitration panel, which in 2004 allowed iTV to significantly reduce its annual concession fee. However, the PM Office appealed to the Central Administrative Court, which on May 9 overruled the arbitration panel's decision. The court's ruling was based in part on the argument that Article 5 was not legally binding because it had not been approved by the Cabinet. The broadcaster has appealed the ruling to the Supreme Administrative Court. In the meantime, it has refused to pay the original concession fee to the PM's Office. Besides reverting to the original concession rate, the PM's Office is demanding iTV pay retroactive concession fees of about Bt1.5 billion and a penalty of Bt76 billion. Recently, iTV executive chairman Niwattumrong Boonsongpaisal said the article had not been inserted but had been in the contract since it was drafted. The concession was granted by the Office of the Permanent Secretary of the PM's Office on July 3, 1995. Peeraphan said the committee would consult with the Council of State and the Office of the Attorney-General to determine if the article was still valid.
|
