‘Pitha’ has accepted the transfer of ITV shares, refraining from wrongdoing It was confirmed and explained that the Electoral Commission is moving forward to form a government
on June 6 Pita Limjaroenrat Mr Kao Klai (Kor Kor.) Party leader and candidate for Prime Minister Showing sincerity in defending the lawsuit against ITV media shares itself, admitting that the shares have been transferred. and ready to explain to the Election Commission of Thailand by stating that on Facebook I am prepared to fight an attempt to revive ITV to stop us.
as you know Since March 7, 2007, the Office of the Permanent Secretary, Office of the Prime Minister has notified the termination of the contract to participate in and operate the UHF Television Station to ITV Public Company Limited (ITV), resulting in the termination of the contract. Reasons why ITV is unable to use frequencies for broadcasting business TV business or telecommunications business since then until now
As a result of the termination of the contract, the spectrum rights reverted to the Office of the Permanent Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Office. which assigns the Public Relations Department to continue providing radio and television broadcasting services for the UHF system
And when the Thai Public Broadcasting Service Act BE 2551 comes into force As a result of Section 57, the frequencies mentioned above became the property of TPBS. The case is still a dispute claiming compensation between ITV and the Office of the Permanent Secretary Office the Prime Minister. Upon termination of the contract, the illegal dispute is still considered by the Supreme Administrative Court.
It can be seen since ITV terminated the contract to participate and operate a UHF TV station, meaning that ITV is unable to use the frequency spectrum for broadcasting business. television or telecommunications business Its media presence ceased on March 7, 2007. Since then, the value of ITV’s shares has declined to almost no economic value.
Subsequently, on 16 March 2007, the court appointed me to be the trustee of my father’s estate. And I was entrusted by the heir who has the right to inherit my father’s inheritance. To receive the transfer of securities, one of which is ITV shares, held by the inheritance instead of heirs, where ITV shares no longer have economic value, and later in 2014, ITV shares were liquidated from the Stock Exchange of Thailand by the Foundation. Stock Exchange of Thailand. As a result, shares can no longer be traded on the stock exchange.
for this stock It is one of the stocks of my father’s estate which I hold on behalf of other heirs. There are many stocks that have been removed from the stock market and have no economic value. As a result, I was assigned by the heirs to hold shares instead of other heirs.
Until I came to work in politics as a list of Future Party MPs to openly inform the account of NACC’s assets and liabilities in this matter. with all sincerity
until the dissolution of the Future Forward Party I was elected to be the leader of the Progressive Party, and my friends and all the MPs of the Progressive Party have carried out their duties in the House of Representatives to the fullest. and in this recent election, I ran for List MPs and the only prime ministerial candidate of the Progressive Party He led the party to the election on May 14 until it won the highest public trust of more than 14 million votes.
In the midst of criticism on the issue of the provisions regarding the interpretation of media payments by candidates, MPs and MPs, at the same time, in fact, it is clear that ITV has not been broadcast since. The effect of the termination of the contract on 7 March 2007 has come into effect. But these days, there are attempts to revive ITV as a media outlet to attack me.
I will quote information according to the ITV financial statement submission form (Sor Bor Chor. 3), for example, financial year 2018-2019, indicating the type of business that is “the activities of a holding company that does not invest primarily in financial business” for the 2020-2021 financial year states the type of business as “Television media”, in the product/service section, states “currently not operating due to litigation”, in the 2022 financial year , indicates the type of business “Television media”, where the products / services are indicated as “advertising media and return on investment”
However, the content in the notes to the financial statements does not show revenue from television media and advertising media as stated in the type of business in any way. The financial statements for the 2022 financial year were submitted to the DBD on May 10, 2023 (just 4 days before election day).
shows that the financial statement submission form and the information in the notes to the financial statements are inconsistent. And it is doubtful that there has been a change in the text stated in the financial statement submission form from “Activities of holding companies that do not mainly invest in the financial business” to “television media” even though they are unable to operate. . and the last year was “Advertising media and return on investment” despite the fact that the notes to the financial statements indicate income from interest and investment in debt securities.
And in the minutes of the ITV shareholders meeting held on April 26, 2023, some shareholders raised questions about a “Does ITV have a media act?” is a question that requires every fair person to consider whether he has a political motive. And ask yourself, is this the behavior of trying to revive ITV back to the press?
With many doubts arising, I decided to negotiate with the heirs who entrusted me to hold the ITV shares, which were my father’s inheritance, instead of other heirs. Until we come to a conclusion that would let me succeed in dividing the inheritance of the ITV shares to other heirs entirely. To prevent problems from the media regeneration process for ITV which is currently going on. In accordance with the doubts mentioned above
I would like to inform all of you that fight this case Considering the decision of the Constitutional Court To go along with several recent Supreme Court orders Considering whether any company is operating a mass media business or not. and whether any person has any prohibited characteristics in terms of holding media shares The court considers the facts of several elements together.
At this level, if the Constitutional Court follows past rulings and maintains unity in interpreting the provisions of this law I am fully confident that I have no prohibited characteristics when standing for election. and does not have any prohibited characteristics of being a candidate for the Prime Minister in any way
for considering that Norms by order of the Supreme Court Red Case No. Lor Sor Kor 24/2566 (Chanchai Issarasenarak) and a number of recent orders from the Supreme Court. it may not be legally binding for the Constitutional Court to consider and decide according to the same norms But preserving the unity of the legal system is the basis of the justice of the rule of law. to prevent the use of interpretations from causing strange effects in the legal system
That is, if it appears that the petitioner in the case is according to the order of the Supreme Court Red Case No. Lor Sor Khor 24/2566, where the Supreme Court ordered that a person should not have prohibited characteristics under section 98(3) of Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand. And the Organic Act on the Election of Members to the House of Representatives, 2018, Section 42(3), it appears that the petitioner was later elected a member of the House of Representatives and still holds shares in Advanced Info Service Company Limited. Public Company Limited and there is a petition to present a case to the Constitutional Court to consider the disqualification from being a member of the House of Representatives of such a person under section 101(6) in conjunction with section 98(3) of the Constitution The Kingdom of Thailand, and the Constitutional Court appears to have ruled that such persons have prohibited characteristics under the aforementioned section. Without considering the intention of the law as a normative order of the Supreme Court above. The case would cause strange effects and greatly affect the unity of the legal system. This caused destabilization of the trust and confidence of the people under the law to the legal normative system of Thailand.
Therefore, in order to maintain certainty and clarity in the legal system and maintain the way in which the interpretation of the law is consistent with the spirit of Article 98(3) and Article 101(6) of the Constitutional Provisions, the Constitutional Court maintains unity in application and interpretation of the provisions The same constitution establishes the same legal effect. which is the internationally accepted standard of the legal system in civilized countries
and for that I am confident that, before I proceed with the transfer of ITV shares, the ITV Company is not involved in any mass media business. I am sure of the facts of the past. But the fact that it will happen from now on, I cannot predict that ITV will be resurrected as a media outlet or not. Thus the transfer of shares to other heirs took place. It is not a transfer of shares by reason of escape from the wrongdoing in any way.
Next process I would like to assure everyone that I am fully prepared to explain to the Election Commission of Thailand, I have no worries or concerns in this case and I will not lose my concentration in my work at all.
After this, I will continue to work to prepare for the transfer of power. Set up a far-reaching government with Pitha as Prime Minister to succeed in the end
No one or any authority can block the consensus of the people who have expressed in the election on May 14 to more than 14 million votes.
May everyone be comfortable. and move forward to change this country together
Read related news.
