Page 136 - Q26 - 0

¥ÿ≈æ“À

direct and independent government regulation on private equity nor

soft law principles and industry standards on this. One might argue

that the reason why Thailand has no such direct and independent

government regulation on private equity would be driven by the fact
that the existing regulatory framework as explained in Paragraph 3 is

proportionately sufficient to protect the public interest as well as the

interest of minority groups such as minority shareholders and

employees. For example, if the portfolio company is listed on the SET,

the companyûs shareholders, among others, will be protected by the

SET and SEC regulations regarding board of directors of a listed

company, especially the regulation concerning a related-party
transaction as elaborated in Paragraph 3.3.

In addition, the reason why there has not been any introduction of

soft law principles and industry standards with respect to private
equity in Thailand like the European Venture Capital Association

Corporate Governance Guidelines for the Management of Privately

Held Companies would be because of the small number of private

equity firms in Thailand, which is still far behind those in the US and

Europe. As such, the topic on whether extra regulatory measures

should be introduced to control cross-border private equity

transactions in the Thai market would still be controversial and
debatable. More study on the costs and benefits of private equityûs

investment in Thailand may need to be further pursued.

¡°√“§¡ - ‡¡…“¬π ÚıˆÛ 125