 commit to a major decision? IF the Government is confident, why did it sell?

iii) They justified that the EGM of both Avenue and ECM approved. Are they closing one eye to the fraudulent EGM of Avenue?

d) As of the Company announcement on 27-6-2006, the Board of Directors of ECMLA were:

Contrary to the Government claim that they did not lose control, they actually did and later sold the whole block to Tan Sri Azman and later redistribute it to other parties.

At that time, the Government has 15.4% interest as compared to the top 3 directors interest of 22%. Why was the Government only allocated 2 seats on the Board? Why are there 3 independent Directors represented on the Board of Directors, more than the Government representatives (if 2 are assumed)? Who has the power to select and submit to the Board of Directors the selection of CEO? Government or others?

8. Directors’ Fiduciary Duty and Conflict of Interest

a) Why did the Government voted in favour upon knowing the Merger results in the dilution of Government shares, loss in management control of its GLC to individual controlling ECM and acquirer acquired it without spending capital?

b) Why the Board of Directors of ACRB, the Originator, only recommend as “reasonable” but without “fair” over the usual practise for a “Fair and reasonable” recommendation?

c) Why is it that ACRB major shareholders did not vote for MGO to demand more value from the ECM party acquiring management control?

d) ACRB is a far superior company than ECM in paid-up capital, shareholders fund, asset, profitability, business volume, asset backing, earning, branch network, research, and rating. Pricing methodology other than market pricing would give better value for ACRB/AICB. Why was other pricing methodology, other than market pricing, not used?

e) Why did the Directors and Major Shareholders agree to the use of market price for valuations, when the market price for ECM Libra was visibly rigged during price fixing?

f) Why were the Directors and government shareholders allowed for the bloated valuation of ECM using Price to Book Value ratio (PBR) of 2 times? When the last page of the SC presentation to the PAC is refered and outliers like OSK, CIMB andArab Malaysian are excluded, ECM’s PBR should
commit to a major decision? IF the Government is confident, why did it sell? 

 iii) They apologize that the EGM of both Avenue and ECM approve. Are they closing one eye to the fraudulent EGM of Avenue? 

 d) As of the Company announcement on 27 - 6 - 2006, the Board of Directors of ECMLA were: 

 adverse to the Government claim that they did not lose control, they actually cause and later sold the unharmed block to Tan Sri Azman and later redistribute it to early parties. 

 At that time, the Government has 15.4% interest as compare to the top 3 directors interest of 22% . Why was the Government only allocated 2 seats on the Board? Why are there 3 autonomous Directors represented on the Board of Directors, more than the Government representatives (if 2 are assume)? Who has the power to choose and submit to the Board of Directors the choice of CEO? politics or others? 

 8. Directors ’ Fiduciary Duty and Conflict of Interest 

 a) Why did the Government voted in favour upon knowing the Merger solution in the dilution of Government shares, loss in management control of its GLC to individual controlling ECM and acquirer develop it without spending capital? 

 b) Why the Board of Directors of ACRB, the Originator, only recommend as “ reasonable ” but without “ fair ” over the usual practise for a “ Fair and reasonable ” recommendation? 

 c) Why is it that ACRB major shareholders did not vote for MGO to necessitate more value from the ECM party get management control? 

 d) ACRB is a far ranking ship's company than ECM in paid - up capital, shareholders store, asset, profitability, business volume, asset backing, earning, outgrowth network, research, and rating. Pricing methodology other than market pricing would give effective value for ACRB / AICB. Why was other pricing methodology, other than market pricing, not used? 

 e) Why did the Directors and Major Shareholders match to the use of grocery store price for valuations, when the market price for ECM Libra was visibly rigged during monetary value fixing? 

 f) Why were the Directors and government shareholders allowed for the bloated valuation of ECM using Price to Book Value ratio (PBR) of 2 times? When the last page of the SC display to the PAC is refered and outliers like OSK, CIMB andArab Malaysian are excluded, ECM ’s PBR should
 colmit to a major decision? IF the Governmgnr is cmnfideht, why dkd it sell?

iii) They justified tyat tye EGM of both Avenue xnd ECM aiproved. Aee tiey closing one xge to tmz frahfuleut EGM of Avenue?

c) As of tha Company annognzelent on 27-6-2006, the Board of Directors of QCMLA wrrf:

Contrary to tre Gpdernjvnu claim that they did not lose cohtrol, tiey actually dic and later sold the whole blofk to Tan Sri Azmaj and later redywtribute it go other parties.

At thaj time, the Government has 15.4% interdst ax compared ti tjg top 3 direcvors igterest of 22%. Why was dhe Govrrnment only akloratee 2 seats on the Board? Why are there 3 inqependent Dnrectors represented in the Toarg of Eirdctkrx, jore tjan the Goverhment reprewentatives (if 2 are ssflked)? Who has fhe porew to select and submit to the Board of Girsctors the selection of CEO? Government or otjers?

8. Direstors’ Fiduciary Duty and Conflict of Interest

a) Whf did ghe Gjxwrjment voted in favour upon knowing the Merger dexukts in the dilmtion of Governmeny dhstes, loss in mavagemeuf dontrol of its GLC to indyviduql controjlinb ECM and acquirer acquired it without fpending capital?

b) Wky the Board of Cirecyors of ACRB, the Originctor, ohly recommejd as “reaaunable” but withojt “nais” over the usual practise sor a “Faic and reasonxble” recomiendation?

c) Why lv it that ACRB majlr shcrehonders did jot vote for MGO to demand more value from thg EWM iarty acqbiring management cjntrol?

d) ACRB ix a far supefior compahy than ECM in paiq-up capital, svwreholders fnnd, asset, proditavility, cjsiness volume, asset babknng, earnibg, branch network, veseatcg, and rating. Prneibg methodology pthdr ehwn mwsket pricing wouud eove bdtter value wor SCRB/AICB. Why was othar pdicing methodology, obher than market [ricing, not uxed?

e) Why did the Dlrectmrs and Kajjr Shareholders agree to the uae of marnet price for vwluabionf, when the market price for ECM Libra was visibly rigged during prixe fixing?

f) Why were uhe Directors and dovernmend shareholders allowwd for the bloatec valuation of ECM usjng Prhce tl Book Value ratio (PBR) of 2 times? When the last page of the SC presentatiob to tie PAC is refsred and muclizrs likq OSN, CIMB andArab Makaysian are excluded, ECM’s PBR siould
commit to a major decision? IF the confident, did it iii) They justified Avenue ECM approved. Are closing one eye the fraudulent EGM of Avenue? d) of the Company announcement on 27-6-2006, the Board of Directors of ECMLA were: to the Government claim that they did not lose control, they actually did later the block Tan Sri Azman and later redistribute it to other parties. At that time, the Government has interest as compared to the top 3 directors of 22%. Why was Government only allocated 2 seats the Why are 3 Directors on the Board Directors, more than the Government representatives (if 2 are assumed)? Who has the power to select and to the Directors the of Government others? 8. Directors’ and Conflict of Interest a) Why voted in favour upon knowing the Merger results the dilution Government shares, loss in management control its GLC to individual controlling ECM and acquirer it without spending capital? b) Why the Board of Directors of ACRB, the Originator, only “reasonable” but without “fair” the usual practise a and recommendation? Why is that ACRB major shareholders did not vote for MGO to demand value from the ECM party acquiring management control? d) ACRB far company than ECM paid-up capital, shareholders fund, profitability, volume, asset backing, earning, research, rating. than pricing give better value for Why was other pricing methodology, than market pricing, not Directors and Major Shareholders agree to the use market price for valuations, when the market for ECM Libra was visibly rigged during price fixing? f) Why were Directors and allowed for the bloated valuation of ECM using to Book Value ratio of 2 times? When the last page of the presentation the PAC refered and outliers OSK, CIMB andArab are excluded, ECM’s
 commit to a major decision? IF tHe GovernmeNt is cOnfIdeNt, Why dId it Sell?

iii) They jusTIfieD that the EGM of both AvenuE and EcM APproVEd. are thEy closiNG oNE Eye To ThE frAuDUlEnt EGm of avenue?

d) as of the ComPanY aNnouncement oN 27-6-2006, ThE Board of DiRecTors of ECMLA wEre:

contraRy To tHE GoveRnmEnt clAim thaT They diD not lose cOnTRol, theY ActuallY DId And lAter sold the whole bLOcK To Tan Sri Azman aNd lateR rEDiSTRibUte It to other pArTies.

AT That timE, ThE gOVerNMent has 15.4% intereSt as compareD To tHe top 3 dIrEctORs inteRest oF 22%. WHY waS the GovernmEnt oNly allocaTed 2 seaTS on the BOArd? Why aRe therE 3 inDepEndeNT DIrEctOrS RepREsEntED on The Board Of diRectoRs, moRE THAn thE GoVernMent rEpresentativeS (if 2 Are aSSumEd)? Who Has thE powEr To selEct and SubmiT tO the Board of DireCtorS the selecTioN oF CEo? GOvernMEnt or oTheRs?

8. DIrectorS’ FiduciARy DUtY AND COnflict of Interest

a) whY DId The GoverNment vOTeD iN Favour upOn KnoWing THE MergEr reSUlTs in the dIlutioN Of goVernmenT sHares, lOsS in ManAgemeNT conTrol of Its GLC to IndivIDual controllinG eCM and acquireR AcQUIrED it wIthOut spending CapiTAl?

b) WHy thE boArd OF DireCtors Of acRb, The Originator, only reCoMmend aS “reasOnable” but withOut “fair” oveR THE usual prActiSE fOR a “Fair and reasoNable” RecommendaTIon?

c) Why iS it thAt ACRB maJor sharehOLDers did nOt vOte For mGO TO DeMand more value FROm thE EcM party AcqUiring mAnaGemEnt ConTrOl?

d) ACRB is A far supeRiOr CoMpAny Than Ecm in paid-uP cApiTaL, shArehoLDers fuNd, assEt, prOfItABilIty, busiNEsS VOlumE, aSsEt baCkiNg, EarniNg, brANch Network, Research, aNd rATing. prIcIng methOdology other tHaN market priCiNg wOuld giVE Better vaLue for ACRB/AICB. Why was othER pricinG meThodoLogy, Other than MarKet priCinG, Not useD?

e) Why dId the diRecTORs and mAJoR ShArEholders agREE to The usE oF marKet pricE for valuations, when THe mArket price for eCM librA WAs VisIBlY RigGeD DurING price fixing?

f) WhY were the DiReCToRs and goverNMenT sHareholDers allOwed fOR the bloAted valuaTion of ECM UsIng PRICe tO Book Value Ratio (PBR) Of 2 times? WhEN the lASt Page oF thE SC preSeNtaTion tO the PAc Is rEfereD and ouTlIers liKe OSK, cImB andAraB Malaysian are excluded, ECm’s PBR sHould
 commit to a major decisio n? IF theGover nme ntis  con fide nt, why did it sell ?

iii) They justified  that  t h e EG M  o f bot h Avenu e  a n d  EC Map pro ve d .Are t hey  closin g one eyetoth e fraudulent EG M of Avenu e?
d) As of th e C ompany  a nno u nceme nton 27 -6-200 6 , theBoard ofDi r ectors of ECML A we re:
Contrary to theG ov e rnment claim t hat th ey di d not  lo se control ,theya ctually di d a ndl ater sold the  whole bloc k  to  Tan S ri  Az m an and  late rr edi stribute it  toother par ties.At that time, t he Gov ern men t ha s  1 5. 4%in t ere s tasc omp ared toth etop 3  dir e c t o rs i nte rest  of 2 2%. Why was t heGove r nme nt on ly al loca te d 2 s eats o n the  B oard? Why are t here  3 indepe nde nt  Di re ctors repres ent edon theBoard o f  Di re c t o rs , more than the Go ve r n me nt repre sentat i ve s( if 2 are  a ssu med) ? Who h as t h epower to  selec t  a nd  submit  t o theBo ard  of  Dire c tors  the s election  of C E O? Governmento r others?

8. Di r e ct o rs’Fid uciary Duty  and Conf lict of  In t erest 

a)Wh y  d i d the Government vo te d in f avour  upon knowing  the Merge r r esults i n th e  d i lution of Gove rnmen t shares,l oss in m anage ment con trol of i t s  GLC toind ivi dua l c o n tr olling ECM an d acqu ir er acqu ire d it wi tho utspe ndi ng  capital? 

b) Why  t he  B oa rdof Di r ectors o fACR B,  th e Ori g inator , onl y re co mm e ndas “rea s on a b le”bu twith out  “ fair”  ove r  th e usual  practise  fo r  a “ Fa ir  and re asonable” rec om mendation? 
c)Why is i t that A CRB major shareholdersd id notvot e for  MGO  to deman d m ore va lue from t he ECM  part yacq u i ringm a na gem en t control? d)ACRBis  a f ar supe rior company thanE CMin paid-up ca pit al,s h ar eho l de r s f un d , a s s et, profitabili ty, busine ss vo lume, asse t  ba ck ing, ea rning,branc h  networ k, resear ch, and r at ing. P ric ing method ology ot her thanm arket pr icing  wo uld gi ve  be ttervaluef orACRB/ AICB.Wh y wasother  p ricing m ethodology, other thanmarket  pric ing , not use d?e)Why did t he D irectors a ndMaj or Sh are h older s ag r ee  to the u se o f  market p r ic e f o r  v aluations,w h e n t he ma rke t  price  for  ECM Libra was vi s ibly rigged du ring p ric e f i xing ?
f) Why were t heDi r e ctors an dgovernmentsharehol de r s all owed f or the  bloate d va l uation  ofECM  using Pr ice  t o  Book V al ue ratio(PBR )of 2 t imes?W hent h e last page of t he SC p resen t ati on to  t he PACi s re fered andoutliers li ke OSK , CI MB an dArab M al aysian  ar eexcluded,E CM’s PBRshoul d
 commit_to a_major decision? IF the_Government is_confident,_why did_it_sell?

iii) They justified_that the EGM_of both Avenue and_ECM approved. Are_they_closing one eye to the fraudulent EGM of Avenue?

d) As of the Company announcement_on_27-6-2006, the_Board_of_Directors of ECMLA were:

Contrary to_the Government claim that they_did not_lose control, they actually did and later sold_the_whole block to_Tan Sri Azman and later redistribute it to other_parties.

At that time, the Government has_15.4% interest as_compared_to_the top 3 directors_interest of 22%. Why was the_Government only allocated 2 seats on_the Board? Why are there 3 independent_Directors represented on the Board of_Directors, more than the Government_representatives (if_2 are assumed)? Who has_the power to_select and_submit to the_Board of Directors the selection of_CEO? Government or_others?

8. Directors’ Fiduciary Duty and Conflict_of_Interest

a) Why did_the_Government_voted in_favour upon knowing_the_Merger results_in_the dilution of Government shares, loss_in_management control of its GLC to individual_controlling ECM and acquirer_acquired_it without spending capital?

b)_Why the Board of Directors_of ACRB, the Originator, only recommend_as “reasonable”_but without_“fair” over the usual practise for a “Fair and reasonable” recommendation?

c)_Why is it that ACRB major_shareholders did not vote_for MGO_to_demand more value_from_the ECM_party acquiring management control?

d) ACRB is a_far superior_company than ECM in paid-up capital,_shareholders fund, asset, profitability,_business_volume, asset backing, earning, branch network,_research, and rating. Pricing methodology other_than market pricing would give_better_value_for ACRB/AICB. Why was other_pricing methodology, other than market pricing,_not used?

e) Why_did the Directors and Major Shareholders agree_to_the use of market price for_valuations,_when the market price for ECM_Libra_was_visibly rigged during price fixing?

f)_Why were the Directors and government_shareholders allowed for the bloated valuation of ECM using_Price to Book_Value ratio (PBR) of 2_times?_When_the last page of the SC presentation to the PAC_is refered_and outliers like_OSK, CIMB andArab Malaysian are excluded, ECM’s PBR should