SFC organization and their frauds

Mr. Ko is one of the heads of the Investment Product Division (IPD) and the minibond was approved by the Corporate Finance Division (CFD), and at the material time the CFD was under the supervision of Mr Ashley Alder. The split between IPD and CFD is to offer an artificial regulatory loophole to Lehman Brothers.

The one the Legco should ask is Mr. Ashley Alder who left the SFC in 2004 and returned to Herbert Smith, the English law firm. He has got a lot of explanation to do regarding his years in the SFC from 2001 to 2004.We should focus on the KEY issues as you can expect the government to throw up a lot of peripheral matters to make everything looks confusing.


I believe that Mr Ko was the manager that approved products selling targeted for the insurance industry. One thing that I am quite sure that he said in the hearing .. "He did not approve minibonds".

As to the suing... we sue SFC in the civil court on systematic charges that are common among all victims in each product.. In other words, all the victims can file the same court paper on the same charges as it is not individual case (mis-selling) anymore. We shall get minimum use of legal spending as we could use "do it yourself" court filing. The key thing is to find a charge that can stand to win big in the court. Once one victim won.. all the victims can follow. If all the victims are to submit all at once, it could cripple the legal system.

If the above works, it is likely that we wait for the JR as there will be more illegal findings on SFC or HKMA or to overturn the 60%/70% buyback. Anyway, we intend to do the preparation work in parallel.. ie. running with the two legs

Question?
So, what was Mr. Ko doing and what was he involved in approving? I didn't understand. I thought he was involved with approval process of at least the Mini-bonds or Constellation. Sounds weird.


Mr Ko was not involved with the approval process on minibonds, constellation as well as ELN. Perhaps, we could ask the legco to summon those who were actually involved with the approval process on the above products at Ko 's level.

The SFC did what it did because of government pressure back in 2001. Who pressed the government not to regulate?? The local and overseas (mainly USA) banks because they stood to make a lot of money with a spineless regulator. To punish the really culpable is not to sue SFC, after all most of those in 2001 have gone. To make your outrage felt, why don't you walk away from those crooks bankers with your money. GO somewhere else, wire your fund (at least a large chunk of it) overseas. Invest in some other assets that is not likely to benefit the crooks bankers. This is more preferable than law suit. Moreover we have too many spineless judges as well.

Foreign banks also issue Minibonds of their own but they would not sell to their own customers, like UBS. And you may only get 0.01% interest in money market funds oversea. In fact, in HK buying assets in cash may be the only way out and I've never seen these lawyers smile working on these deals right now.

Some call it 'social dynamic' which means that you do not know and probably need not concern too much about the exact impact of certain action because the causal relationships involved are multifarious and intractable.