… Caught bullying SAS and TXT Group BV
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been caught in a shocking, creepy game in a matter that involves shares that were legally acquired by TXT Group BV at Ghana Oil Company (GOIL).
In a clear use of bully tactics, the SEC, under the watch of Rev. Dr. Daniel Ogbarmey-Tetteh, Director-General, is frustrating TXT Group BV from transferring the shares it legally acquired from GOIL.
One Patrick Kingsley-Nyinah who was handling the investment for TXT Group BV says that the company does not have any right to alert the Strategic African Securities (SAS) of intentions to transfer the shares.
In the estimation of Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah, TXT Group BV does not have any right to ask SAS to sell its shares, without his knowledge, although the company had parted ways with him in connection with the deed of assignment it had with him.
There are murmurings within the SEC that the Director-General was entertaining Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah because of his relationship with him, as a working colleague in the same company sometime back.
What is intriguing is the fact that the complaint letter that the SEC was entertaining does not even have a signature.
Again, Mr. Kingsley-Nyinah, in his letter to SEC, could not state the year that TXT Group BV made the intentions, an error that should have informed the SEC not to entertain him.
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.’’
The Inquisitor has been alerted within the SEC that the strong-worded letter from the lawyers of TXT Group BV ruffled feathers because some top officials had raised issues with how TXT Group BV and SAS were being handled.
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.
Insiders at SEC say that their outfit was wading into areas that were not within their jurisdiction as the action from Kingsley-Nyinah was not informed by any legal basis.
Source: The Inquisitor