There are fracases raging within the corridors of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) over how issues involving the transfer of legitimate shares belonging to TXT Group BV were being handled.
In the estimation of insiders at SEC, the Director-General, Rev. Dr. Daniel Ogbarmey-Tetteh, was wading in issues that do not fall within the remit of the SEC.
There are concerns that the actions by the D-G were nothing but a clear of case of trying to satisfy a party that was challenging the TXT Group BV in their genuine and legitimate business.
At the centre of the controversies bordering on the transfer of TXT Group BV shares in Ghana Oil Company (GOIL) from the Strategic African Securities Limited (SAS) to Republic Bank Limited (Custody Services) is Mr. Patrick Kingsley-Nyinah.
Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah, per what insiders at SEC have, is a former working colleague of the Rev. Dr. Ogbarmey-Tetteh.
Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah is a known investment banker and former Board Member of the Agricultural Development Bank (adb).
The Inquisitor has it that there were objections from other top management members of the SEC when Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah wrote to that outfit challenging the transfer of TXT Group BV shares from SAS to Republican Bank.
However, the SEC Director-General would not take any of the issues raised by those who thought that SEC was embarking on an illegality.
Those who were objecting to the involvement of the SEC in the TXT Group BV shares transfer matter raised concerns in the anomalies in the complaint that Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah filed at the SEC.
The swiftness with which the SEC acted on Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah’s complaint was a kind of shock to some of the top officials of SEC.
Documents obtained from the vault of SEC indicate that Mr. Francis-Nyinah’s complaint was sent personally to Rev. Dr. Ogbarmey-Tetteh via email on March 10, 2020 at 12.29 AM.
The SEC Director-General with alacrity asked Mr. Francis Boadu, Head, Broker-Dealer and Advisers, to write to SAS, on his behalf, inviting representatives for a meeting on Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah’s complaint.
Not even a strong-worded letter from the lawyers of TXT Group BV would prevent SEC from poking its nose into affairs of share transfer that was outside its borders.
Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah, in his letter to SEC, could not state the year that TXT Group BV engaged him for the deed of assignment made the intentions, an error that should have informed the SEC not to entertain his complaint.
There are murmurings within SEC that Rev. Dr. Ogbarmey-Tetteh has lost his meticulous nature because of his involvement in the TXT Group BV matter.
Lawyers for TXT Group BV, Gyandoh Asmah & Co, in a strong-worded letter directly to the SEC Director-General, said that their client (TXT Group BV) had the right to sell its shares without hindrances.
The letter, dated March 11, 2020, said: “We have written to you owing to the legal implication of the intention by the SEC in the matter involving the TXT Group BV shares. We have not received a formal complaint sent to SEC by anyone disputing the legal ownership of our client’s lawfully owned shares.’’
The letter, obtained by The Inquisitor from the vault of the SEC, said: ‘’Much as we acknowledge the object of SEC as regards ensuring an efficient, fair and transparent securities market and do appreciate the extent of power accorded SEC to achieve its object, the said power has a defined scope of application. Indeed, a careful review of Securities Industry Act 2016 (Act 929) would indicate that that SEC’s jurisdiction within the context of complaints/disputes regarding securities, is limited to relations between regulated industry of a private individual/entity to ownership of shares in a company as same constitutes individual personal rights to personal property.”
It stated that ‘’indeed, there is no prima facie evidence of any evidence by the ‘complainant’ and therefore he lacks the requisite capacity to get involved in matter relating to instructions issued by our clients to SAS to transfer its shares to a new broker, Republic Bank. There is no dispute, no share ownership documentation or any legal obstacle that should pause or legally delay this instruction. Any such action is a tort in law.”
It went further that ‘’we have duly advised our client that the transaction contemplated by its letter to SAS does not constitute a dispute over which SEC has the power to make a determination. SEC’s purported invitation to determine who owns the said share is not grounded in law. Our client is therefore amenable to any process under SEC’s auspices aimed at making a determination of a non-existing ‘’dispute’’ or complaint over transfer of shares to another broker unless a legal basis for your invitation is provided.’’
It is not clear whether or not the SEC had been able to gather the moral courage to write back to the lawyers of TXT Group BV on the matter.
The SEC was scheduled to meet with SAS and other parties involved in the TXT Group BV, but it is not clear whether the meeting took place after the red flags from the lawyers for the TXT Group BV.
Source: The Inquisitor/ tnpnewsonline.com