The Central Administrative Court has yet to schedule its first hearing on a landmark case in which state officials have been accused of being derelict in their duty - for not revoking the licences of iTV, Shin Satellite and AIS after majority control was sold to Singapore's Temasek Holdings early this year.

The potential consequences of this lawsuit could be far-reaching. According to the plaintiff, Rangsit University law lecturer Sattra Toaon, state officials at various agencies were negligent because they failed to act according to rules and regulations.

At least four laws were violated when the family of deposed premier Thaksin Shinawatra sold their majority stake in Shin Corp to the Singaporean firm. Shin Corp is the holding firm for iTV, ShinSat, AIS, and other firms sold to Temasek.

First, Articles 39 and 40 of the 1997 Constitution were breached because telecom and broadcasting firms are supposed to be owned and operated by Thais.

Second, the Bt73-billion Shin takeover did not comply with the Foreign Business Act, which caps the foreign ownership limit of Thai firms at 49 per cent.

Altogether, Temasek has direct and indirect control of up to 96 per cent of Shin via the illegal use of nominees.

Third, the transaction did not have prior approval from the National Telecom Commission - as required by law - based on an official report from the Senate, which has responsibility for oversight.

Sattra has said state officials, including those at the Information, Communication and Technology Ministry, the PM's Office, and state-owned TOT Plc, should have taken action against iTV, AIS, and ShinSat after the Shin takeover in January.

As a result of their negligence, the interests of the Thai public and consumers have been damaged.

Put simply, all licences - such as the one for the right to operate iTV, a national TV network set up by the PM's Office in the 1990s, or one for the right to operate the Thaicom satellites used by the Thai government, or the right to operate the country's largest mobile phone network (with more than 17 million users) - are regarded as strategic national assets. Their ownership must be tightly regulated or else national interests may be compromised.

A good example about such a matter is the US government's move recently to prevent China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) from taking over Unocal, the US energy company, which was deemed a key strategic utility.

Due to intervention from both the US Congress and the executive branch, CNOOC had to pull out, and Unocal was later purchased by another US energy giant, Chevron.

In the case of Thailand, the strategic national interests in both iTV and Shin Sat are obvious, even though it might be less so as far as AIS is concerned.

In short, no well-managed nation would ever allow foreign firms or an entity controlled by a foreign government to buy nearly 100 per cent of the shares in a key television station or its satellites, that can contain sensitive national intelligence data.

That's why many regard the judicial review of this case to be of huge importance and say the case must be allowed to go its full course - to ensure that strategic national interests and Thai access to those utilities are legally protected by the rule of law.

Nophakhun Limsamarnphun,

Souroutai Sapsomboon

The Nation