Remisier concedes front-running before executing trading instructions from defendant
An OCBC Securities remisier said during the
ongoing penny stocks trial that market intelligence shared between brokers and
clients, who then acted on the information, could push up share prices.
The prosecution witness also conceded under
cross-examination on Friday that he had front-run instructions from one of the
accused, Quah Su-Ling, 54.
Remisier Ng Kit Kiat has earlier told the
court that he took instructions from Quah and her co-accused John Soh Chee Wen
on trades of Blumont Group, Asiasons Capital (now Attilan Group) and LionGold
Corp, collectively known as BAL from August 2012 to Oct 3, 2013.
Quah and 59-year-old Soh are said to have
controlled a web of 189 accounts to manipulate the market for the BAL counters,
and used intermediaries and brokers like Mr Ng to operate the scheme.
On Friday, the fourth day of the joint
trial of the two accused, Quah's lawyer, Philip Fong, placed a spotlight on the
flow of information in the market. Under questioning, Mr Ng agreed with Mr Fong
that brokers share market intelligence with one another as well as with
clients, and that such activity could push up the price of a counter when they
act on the information to trade.
Mr Ng also conceded that after receiving
trading instructions from Quah, he placed trades for his wife before executing
the orders that Quah had requested.
Mr Fong drew out that concession after presenting
Mr Ng, who initially denied front-running, with two instances in 2013 in which
Mr Ng had placed orders through his wife's account ahead of similar trades for
other accounts that the prosecution said were improperly controlled by Soh and
Quah.
Front-running occurs when a broker does a
personal trade on a stock, acting on knowledge that his client wants a trade
executed on the stock later. There is an opportunity to profit by trading in
advance of customers' orders and closing out one's position following the share
price movements caused by the execution of the customers' orders.
Mr Ng testified that Quah would sometimes
instruct him to hold back trade orders for a while, this explained why her
trade was not keyed in immediately. However, Mr Fong pressed him: "But the
whole point is after Quah Su-Ling had given you instructions, you keyed in your
wife's order first."
Mr Ng: "Looks like. "
Mr Fong: "Do you agree you were
front-running in this case? "
Mr Ng: "Yes."
Soh's lawyer N Sreenivasan said Mr Ng
"has indulged in the worst case of front-running possible", when the
Senior Counsel was responding to Justice Hoo Sheau Peng's question on whether
or not the defence is not disputing that trading instructions were given to Mr
Ng.
Soh is not denying he made certain calls at
certain times, Mr Sreenivasan said, without further elaboration.
When cross-examining Mr Ng, Mr Fong said
that Quah did not use accounts belonging to others including Ms Ng Su Ling's to
conduct trades through this witness without Ms Ng's written authorisation.
Mr Fong suggested that the remisier had
mistaken Quah to be Ms Ng, because both have the same given names. But Mr Ng,
who takes trade orders by phone, disagreed and testified that the two women
have different voices.
Ms Ng was then an independent director of
LionGold and her accounts were among those that the prosecution alleged were
controlled by the two accused.
Mr Fong also tried to poke holes in Mr Ng's
testimony on how he updated Quah and Soh on the alleged unauthorised trades.
The lawyer said some of the reports Mr Ng sent via SMS were incomplete or
erroneous, making these reports not meaningful.
Mr Fong said: "You were in fact not
reporting to Ms Quah or 'Peter Chew'."
Soh was said to have used the name
"Peter Chew" in his dealings with Mr Ng.
The witness disagreed and explained that he
had made typographical errors in some reports. Further, the reports were
supposed to reflect only the buy trades.
Mr Fong argued that Soh and Quah did not
ask for these daily reports, but Mr Ng shot back saying the duo did not stop
him from sending them either.
Mr Ng is the first prosecution witness to
take the stand in the trial, which is a culmination of investigations into the
circumstances that led to the early October 2013 collapse in the BAL shares,
which saw S$8 billion wiped off in their market value in a span of three days.
A third defendant, Goh Hin Calm, has
already pleaded guilty to abetting Soh and Quah, allowing them to use his
accounts and helping them keep tabs on their shareholding of the BAL shares.
The trial has been adjourned until April
22.
Tay Peck Gek
30 March 2019
Comments