Pan-El case: Tan Koon Swan won’t sue

A prominent Malaysian businessman and politician imprisoned for commercial crimes that led to the collapse of Singapore-based Pan-Electric Industries (Pan-El) in the 1980s will not take legal action against his prosecutors, despite suggestions that he may have been wrongly convicted.

Comments

Guanyu said…
Pan-El case: Tan Koon Swan won’t sue

Yong Yen Nie
13 September 2012

A prominent Malaysian businessman and politician imprisoned for commercial crimes that led to the collapse of Singapore-based Pan-Electric Industries (Pan-El) in the 1980s will not take legal action against his prosecutors, despite suggestions that he may have been wrongly convicted.

Mr Tan Koon Swan, 71, was a rising star in the corporate scene and leader of the Malaysian Chinese Association in 1985 when he pleaded guilty to manipulating Pan-El shares and other crimes. As a result, his corporate and political career went up in smoke.

Now a book by his prosecutor, Mr Glenn Knight, suggests that Mr Tan was prosecuted under the wrong charges. That resulted in what may have been a judgment error by the courts as well, he said in his book, titled The Prosecutor.

Nevertheless, Mr Tan said in a statement yesterday: “I have no intention of pursuing any action of whatever nature against anybody. I do not see the need or the wisdom to revisit those years of anguish.”

Earlier, he told The Straits Times that his prosecution and imprisonment were “water under the bridge”.

The Pan-El crisis still resonates in business circles in both Malaysia and Singapore today. It was one of the largest corporate scandals of the 1980s, and Pan-El’s collapse forced the stock exchanges in both countries to close temporarily.

Mr Tan was slapped with 15 charges in the case, pleaded guilty to all of them and served two years behind bars in Singapore. He was later declared bankrupt for failing to pay bank loans, and spent another year in jail in Malaysia.

Mr Tan is now a businessman with dealings in China, and has not been in the public eye since he was released from prison. He now regards Mr Knight as a friend, and despite the revelations in the book, said he would like to let bygones be bygones.

“I am very happy doing what I am doing now, spending time with my family and friends,” he said in a statement sent to The Straits Times.

Mr Knight, when contacted last night, clarified that Mr Tan was charged as stated in 1985, and his conviction was later affirmed by the Court of Appeal.

But in 1996, then Chief Justice Yong Pung How acquitted another man accused of charges similar to those Mr Tan was prosecuted under.

Mr Knight said the judge had clarified that the section used in the Companies Act was meant to be used for a civil - not criminal - case.

“I told Mr Tan that at that point in time he could apply for a pardon,” said Mr Knight, pointing out that he spoke to Mr Tan in 2010. “I apologised to Mr Tan in my belief as a Christian, and not as a former prosecutor.”

It would then have been left to the authorities to ascertain if he had been correctly convicted based on an application for a pardon, he added.

Mr Knight said: “Read my book. It’s all there.”

Popular posts from this blog

Two ex-UOBKH staff charged with lying to MAS over due diligence reports on a Catalist aspirant