Panel of judges voted 2 to 1 to declare Manulife bankrupt
Panel of judges voted 2 to 1 to declare Manulife bankrupt
Fitri Wulandari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta
The bankruptcy ruling handed down by the Central Jakarta
Commercial Court on insurance firm PT Asuransi Jiwa Manulife
Indonesia (AJMI) was based upon a 2 to 1 vote, with presiding
judge Hasan Basri voting against the decision.
The two other judges, Ch. Kristipurnami Wulan and Tjahjono,
declared AJMI bankrupt last week on foot of a petition filed by
the receiver of the now defunct PT Danareksa Sakti Sejahtera
(DSS) over an unpaid dividend in 1999.
AJMI is controlled by Canada's Manulife Financial Corp., while
DSS is Manulife's former local partner in AJMI.
According to the official transcript of the decision, the
differences between the three judges centered around whether AJMI
had been proven to have met the necessary conditions to be
declared bankrupt as stipulated in article 1 of Law No. 4/1998 on
bankruptcy.
This article provides that a debtor who has two or more
creditors and has failed to pay at least one mature and
collectible debt may be declared bankrupt by the court at the
behest of any of the creditors.
Judge Hasan Basri in his dissenting opinion insisted that AJMI
could not be declared bankrupt as these conditions had not been
satisfied.
He argued that the plaintiff, DSS, had failed to present in
evidence the balance sheet and statement of earnings that had
been approved by the shareholders' meeting of AJMI.
"Since there is no balance sheet and statement of earnings
approved by the shareholders' meeting, it has not been proven in
law that the accused (AJMI) had a mature debt," Hasan reasoned.
He also argued that according to article 54 of Law No.1 /1995,
the plaintiff should have first filed a lawsuit with the district
court to ask AJMI to hold a shareholders' meeting to approve the
necessary financial statements, and decide on the use of profits
and distribution of a dividend to the shareholders.
He said that if AJMI failed to obey the district court's
order, then the plaintiff would have the right to file a
bankruptcy petition with the Commercial Court.
By contrast, Judges Kristapurnami and Tjahjono insisted that
AJMI had satisfied the conditions to be declared bankrupt as it
had been proven that the company had failed to pay a dividend.
They reasoned that the necessity to pay a dividend was based
upon the following facts: audited 1999 and 1998 financial
statements and proven profits in 1999.
AJMI had admitted that based on the audited financial
statements produced by the independent auditor on Dec. 31, 1999,
it had made a profit of Rp 186,306,000,000 as of that date, they
said.
The majority on the court insisted that the dividend claimed
by the plaintiff should have been distributed in 1999.