sekedar pembelajaran buat kita semua, harap memahami dengan baik apa yg
kita baca dan hati-hati dalam menuduh oarng di depan publik.
penjelasan dan minta maafnya vaulst...@yahoo.com di milis OB sudah cukup
bagi saya. Kiranya maalah ini boleh ditutup sampai di sini saja.
kelihatannya beliau salah paham karena tdk mengerti apa tujuan KIPS BUMI
dan pernyataan Pak Rully.
saya undang vaulstrad utk bertemu saya jika ingin lebih jelas mengenai
perjuangan KIPS BUMI.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [KIPS-BUMI] Tuduhan: Ketua KIPS makan suap
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 15:41:56 +0700
From: Aria Santoso
To: <kips-b...@yahoogroups.com>
dalam pemberitaan oleh Jakarta Globe, Pak Rully mewakili suara pemegang
saham minoritas.
*Meanwhile, *a representative of Bumi's minority shareholders*, Rully
Oetomo,
said: "We welcome the fact that Bumi's management is willing to renegotiate
and seek a better price for Fajar Bumi."*
dan "*representative of Minority shareholder*" dituduh oleh
vaulst...@yahoo.com <mailto:vaulst...@yahoo.com> melalui posting email
di milis OB telah menerima suap.
**Even leader / representative of Minority shareholder bisa di beli... ;(**
untuk kawan2 semua:
saya ingin kita coba merenungkan perbedaan antara "hukum" & "etika".
pelanggaran hukum bisa dituntut tapi pelanggaran etika tidak bisa dituntut.
contoh sederhana:
* jika saya mengambil barang milik anda tanpa ijin walaupun nilainya
kecil, maka saya bisa dituntut karena bisa dikenakan pasal pencurian
selama ada bukti dan saksi.
* jika saya melukai anda, maka saya bisa dituntut karena bisa dikenakan
pasal penganiayaan selama ada bukti dan saksi.
* jika saya meludahi anda di muka umum, maka saya bisa dituntut karena
bisa dikenakan pasal perbuatan tidak menyenangkan selama ada saksi yg cukup.
* jika saya kentut di dekat anda, dan saya tidak mengaku. anda tinggal
kebauan, dongkol, tapi saya tidak bisa dituntut. hanya secara etika
pergaulan saya akan tidak disukai jika memiliki kebiasaan seperti itu.
apakah anda bisa menuntut mereka yg tidak terbukti bersalah secara hukum?
terlepas dari anda suka atau tidak suka.
itulah kenyataannya...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Sent:* Saturday, June 20, 2009 3:07 PM
*To:* kips-b...@yahoogroups.com
*Subject:* RE: [KIPS-BUMI] Tuduhan: Ketua KIPS makan suap
Lho koq jadi pak Rully yang kena tuduhan? Setahu saya yang melakukan
penilaian itu kan MAPPI bukan KIPS-BUMI. Emang ketua MAPPI nya pak Rully
juga?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To: kips-b...@yahoogroups.com
Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:57:33 +0700
Subject: [KIPS-BUMI] Tuduhan: Ketua KIPS makan suap
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [ob] Bumi Investors Say: 'No Probe? No Problem' - APA GUE
BILANG! INDO UDAH RUSAK! INVESTOR LUAR LARI SEMUA
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: PHT <vaulst...@yahoo.com <mailto:vaulst...@yahoo.com>>
Reply-To: obrolan-bandar@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:obrolan-bandar@yahoogroups.com>
To: obrolan-bandar@yahoogroups.com <mailto:obrolan-bandar@yahoogroups.com>
Even leader / representative of Minority shareholder bisa di beli... ;(
Takut kali kalau masalah ini berlanjut saham dia nanti kena margin call...
jadi boke... dan mendingan jg terima duit dulu dari orang tertentu....
---------------------------------------
Bumi Investors Say: 'No Probe? No Problem'
In 2007, Indonesia was ranked worst out of 11 regional markets in the Asian
Corporate Governance Association survey, and, judging by the market
regulator's apparent whitewash of the PT Bumi Resources probe, nothing much
has changed.
However, despite the potential damage to the credibility of the bourse and
the regulator - not to mention the interests of small investors - it now
appears that it's a case of "out of sight, out of mind," with analysts and
even Bumi's minority shareholders suddenly saying they are happy with the
decision of the Capital Market and Financial Institution Supervisory Agency
(Bapepam-LK).
In January, the agency launched a probe into the Bumi's purchase of three
coal firms - PT Darma Henwa, PT Fajar Bumi Sakti and PT Pendopo Energi
Batubara - for a total of Rp 6.18 trillion ($593 million) after an investor
and media outcry over allegations that the acquisitions were overpriced.
It was also alleged that the acquisitions amounted to a material transaction
requiring the approval of Bumi shareholders - which was never given - -and
that some of the coal firms were actually affiliated with Bumi's owners, the
Bakrie group of companies, through obscure cross-shareholding arrangements.
However, after a seemingly interminable probe that included the recruitment
of an outside appraiser, the only fault Bapepam could come up with was that
the price paid for one of the targets, PT Fajar Bumi Sakti, was Rp 370
billion too high.
But even here Bumi was given an easy way out - all it had to do was
renegotiate the price and bring it down to a "reasonable" level, which it
says it is now in the process of doing.
The market watchdog also let Bumi off the hook on the material transaction
question, saying that since the transactions took place in different fiscal
years the issue of materiality did not arise - a view that many would
consider excessively legalistic given that all of the transactions took
place within little more than one week. Dharma Henwa was bought on Dec. 30,
Pendopo Energi Batubara on Jan. 5 and Fajar Bumi Sakti on Jan. 7.
Capital market regulations designed to protect the interests of minority
shareholders require a company to seek shareholder approval for a
transaction if its value exceeds 10 percent of the company's revenue or 20
percent of its market value. In this case, the combined value of the
transactions would have required such approval had they not been completed
in different years.
On the affiliation issue, Bapepam has completely abandoned its investigation
without coming up with any findings, saying that the question is now
irrelevant.
Indra Safitri, an independent capital market legal consultant, said that
Bapepam had based its actions on the findings of the independent appraiser.
"The other issues become irrelevant if the prices paid are reasonable,"
he said, when asked whether the market watchdog was justified in abandoning
its affiliation probe.
Meanwhile, a representative of Bumi's minority shareholders, Rully Oetomo,
said: "We welcome the fact that Bumi's management is willing to renegotiate
and seek a better price for Fajar Bumi."
Rully said that since the transactions were found to have been nonmaterial,
Bumi would not now have to seek shareholder approval. A meeting had been
scheduled for this purpose this coming Friday.
"We will not push Bapepam to continue the investigation into the affiliation
issue if we are happy with the price," Rully said.
But despite the newfound acquiescence of the company's shareholders, doubts
nevertheless persist, not to mention concerns over the future of corporate
governance here as a whole, with one analyst having aptly characterized the
entire affair as "nothing more than a game."
Jakarta Globe
.
