Daily TribuneContrary to Mr. Kamrul’s claims, all protective measures taken by the Foundation were carried out in good faith, in response to his request for assistance and support
(FILE PHOTO) Founder of ASA Philippines Kamrul Tarafder
Photo courtesy of ASA Philippines
ASA Philippines, through counsel Cruz, Marcelo and Tenefrancia, issued a reply to the articles printed from 5 to 11 November, ASA Philippines former president and chief executive officer Kamrul Tarafder and documents he provided.
The following is the seventh part of a series of the letter disputing Kamrul’s points:
Kamrul: “In addition, and finally it is highly probable that the security threats are in fact emanating from within the ASA Board.
Despite several objections and pleas from Kamrul and another board member, the firm was still hired and managed to intrude into the privacy of Kamrul and his family’s personal life such as the penetration of his home and office and stalking family members without their knowledge and consent.
His objections were taken against him by the Board and he was accused of being noncooperative and, worse, being not in the right frame of mind. Despite his objections, the ASA Board insisted and successfully engaged the security consultant in violation of the rights to privacy of Kamrul and his family.”
ASA Philippines: The claim that security threats may have been originating from the Board is a malicious and baseless allegation, and is categorically denied by all Board members.
The Board has acted with integrity and transparency, prioritizing Mr. Kamrul’s safety.
Contrary to Mr. Kamrul’s claims, all protective measures taken by the Foundation were carried out in good faith, in response to his request for assistance and support.
In reality, it was Mr. Kamrul who declined to cooperate by sharing with the Foundation the evidence of the threats against him and his family.
The Foundation advised him to avoid further involvement in the investigation, as this could pose additional risks to his safety.
However, Mr. Kamrul’s actions were counterproductive and inconsistent with what would typically be expected from someone facing such threats.
The Articles wrongly suggest that ASA’s decision to engage Associated Risk and its local affiliate, Olympus Security Management Solutions, was inappropriate due to alleged corruption. This claim relies on an unverified Google review by “Kuya Benito,” which lacks credibility.
The Board thoroughly vetted Associated Risk and found no evidence of corruption or unethical practices.
The Foundation, in support of the reports of the alleged threats against Mr. Kamrul his family, and the Foundation, engaged a reputable firm to truly determine the source of the supposed threats against Mr. Kamrul (despite Mr. Kamrul’s lack of full cooperation), through a risk assessment.
The risk assessment aimed to determine whether Mr. Kamrul was indeed under threat. The threat assessment was conducted through various methods, including public surveillance and personal interviews among others.
After due proceedings and investigations conducted, including an interview with Mr. Kamrul, the firm issued an assessment which suggested the possible falsity of Mr. Kamrul’s representations regarding the threats. This assessment was based on observed inconsistencies in Mr. Kamrul’s behavior and representations.
Kamrul: “Kamrul said he was removed as president based on “fabricated and twisted allegations” that included: involvement in IT matters of Jyosna Inc. even though these were related-party transactions through his son’s ownership and management of Jyosna; consistently obstructing the Foundation’s adoption of the new CAMS computer system in favor of Jyosna’s ATMOS.”
Opposing the establishment of good governance initiatives and the proposed controls for checks and balances by the Board of Trustees, such as the establishment of an information technology (IT) steering committee; mismanaging the data breach that occurred in October 2023; disputing the findings of third-party cybersecurity firm Trustwave Inc. on the data breach where clients’ information was exfiltrated. Threatening the foundation’s IT department heads and accusing them of bypassing Kamrul’s authority as president, instead of just focusing on resolving the data breach; and not speaking up in defense of the foundation amid Jyosna’s accusation of criminal acts after the retrieval of a copy of a data file containing information about the foundation’s clients and issuing a Special Administrative Order directing the foundation’s staff to refrain from taking instructions from the board and its committees without Kamrul’s permission, in direct contravention of the Foundation’s principles of transparency, accountability and effective governance.
Kamrul said he was not allowed to respond to these false allegations during the meeting, but he sent a letter-response anyway disputing all the allegations.”
ASA Philippines: Mr. Kamrul was not removed as President of the Foundation based on fabricated or distorted allegations. In fact, he was lawfully and legitimately removed from his position due to a loss of trust and confidence, as well as conflicts of interest, following a vote by the Board of Trustees on 20 May 2024.
There were multiple discussions over several months between Ambassador Cuisia and Mr. Kamrul, as well as between the late Ambassador Dee and Mr. Kamrul, aimed at aligning with Mr. Kamrul. However, these discussions did not yield a resolution.
It is not true that Mr. Kamrul was not given an opportunity to address the concerns raised against him during the meeting. He was given the opportunity to explain his side. It was only thereafter that a vote was taken by the Board resulting in his removal as president and CEO of the Foundation.
(To be continued)
