Investigation of fraudulent practices

Hi Kin Lian,

The Straits Times Forum publised a letter entitled "Should MAS Act". A week later, the MAS gave a short reply which was off tangent to the key issue. The MAS said that the jurisdications are different.

In the case of the US, the SEC filed charges of malpractices and fraud  against Goldman Sach. It was not about breaching regulations of the US jurisdiction, but was about fraudulent practices and non-disclosures. Fraud is fraud regardless of the jurisdiction in question.

Resources and power to investigate and prove these are way above the capabilities any individual or group of individuals possess. Investigations with access to confidential documents can only be done successfully, just like in the US, with the direct involvement of the authorities.

There are circumstantial evidence to warrant investigations in the US. Goldman Sach in its defence was also reported (in ST's May 2) to have alleged that other US investments banks were also doing similar things, not just it alone. That proves the point of how predatorial these banks were back then and operating in packs.

How can MAS totally ignore this course of action of investigation when even countries in Europe may also be following in the US footsteps.

Of course, entities like Morgan Stanley are innocent until proven guilty. But how can they ever be proven guility if MAS refuses to investigate. What's in MAS's minds and agenda is anyone's guess. But it will be a Himalayan task to attempt a private class action suit in the US on transactions booked in Singapore without the sympathetic support and empowerment of local authorities.