Prodromou blasts investment companies

DISY deputy Prodromos Prodromou yesterday came out all guns blazing over the Supreme Court decision to rule as unconstitutional a law forcing listed investment companies to invest 80 per cent of their capital into the stock market (CSE).

The decision has prompted many investment companies to contemplate filing multi-million pound lawsuits to win back over £150 million they claim they lost by complying with the law.

In a written statement yesterday, Prodromou acknowledging the Supreme Court decision, but saying that, apart from the law, people should also pay some attention to justice.

Prodromou said there was a “complete absence of even basic justice in the CSE orgy that took place in Cyprus”.

He wondered when the courts, Supreme or conventional, would decide on what had been officially recognised as a “systematic defrauding” of the public.

“Would it ever be possible for any court or authority in this country to… rule on the outrageously illegal, devious and beyond all measure unethical activities of certain interest groups, either through investment companies or otherwise?”

The Supreme Court ruled in favour of nine investment companies on the grounds that the law, passed in April 2000, took away their right to handle their money in the best interests of their investors.

“The triumphant comments by investment company spokesmen after the decision, accompanied by threats that they would demand compensation, should be cross-checked with information I expect them to be ready to publish in order to determine the real effect of the annulled legislation,” Prodromou said.

He added: “Maybe it is time to discuss the case of an investment company, which scrambled to secure its investors’ money and profits by purchasing a 20 per cent stake in an unlisted company at a price many times higher than the price asked by that company for the whole of its assets.”

Prodromou wondered what was worse: the Parliament’s attempt to put some form of control in place or these companies selling their shares at a higher price than their nominal value?