KCI explains

We refer to the article regarding the court proceedings involving our client, PT Kangar Consolidated Industries (KCI) that appeared in the Oct. 31 edition of The Jakarta Post on page 3.

Hereby we wish to clarify that it is not correct that we gave no response to PT Multi Inti Trada (MIT), when they asked to discuss a settlement. The fact is that we repeatedly submitted our objections to the judges because the mediation process was bypassed as MIT refused to take part in the mediation process, even though it is mandatory under the law.

We also wish to reiterate that the attachment ruling is irregular because neither MIT's request for the attachment nor the evidence it submitted met the requirements of the Supreme Court Circular, such as (i) MIT only submitted as evidence copies of the Distributor Agreement and termination of the Distributor Agreement, which did not prove MIT's concern that KCI might dispose of its assets (in fact, KCI would need prior approval from the General Meeting of Shareholders to sell or transfer its assets); (ii) MIT did not specify the assets to be attached; (iii) the value of the attached assets far exceeds the amount claimed; (iv) KCI has not been given proper opportunity to be heard or to defend itself prior to the issuance of the attachment ruling; and (v) the judges did not prioritize the attachment on movable assets. As such, considering these conditions, the judges should not have granted the attachment ruling.

Thus, it is clear that KCI has been unequally treated during the court proceedings of the case. Further, the attachment ruling could contradict the RI government's effort to attract foreign investment as this unfair treatment may eventually affect Owens- Illinois, KCI's major shareholder, in deciding on further investment in Indonesia.

RAHAYUNINGSIH HOED, ALEXANDRA GERUNGAN Legal Counsels for PT Kangar Consolidated Industries Jakarta