In a letter last 19 December, ASA Philippines former president and CEO Kamrul Tarafder gave a rebuttal to the statements of the law firm of the microfinance foundation he once led. Tarafder sought the Daily Tribune’s assistance to set the record straight.

19 December 2024

Editorial Board

Daily Tribune

Makati City

We write as a response to the recent articles published involving Mr. Kamrul Tarafder’s and Mr. Simon Tarafder’s disputes with ASA Philippines Board.

Conflict of Interest

ASA Philippines’ attempt to present its version of events regarding the conflict-of-interest allegation against Mr. Kamrul Tarafder (Kamrul) raises more questions than answers. By ASA’s own admission, Kamrul disclosed his son’s potential business venture to the Board. This act of transparency, despite having all the opportunity to withhold such information, demonstrates good faith on his part.

The Board deliberated on the matter and implemented measures to address the perceived conflict of interest, effectively curtailing Kamrul family’s capacity to engage in microfinance activities.

The issue should have ended there. However, Amb. Jose Cuisia and Mr. Richard Dee chose to revive it, leading to unwarranted character attacks against Mr. Kamrul. To clarify, Mr. Simon Tarafder (Simon) currently holds no stake or interest in any microfinance institution, contrary to claims made by certain ASA Board members.

While we acknowledge that Mr. Dee, Mr. Gotuaco, and Amb. Cuisia acted under the advice of their legal counsel, shirking personal accountability behind legal advice reflects poorly on their leadership.

As for allegations that Kamrul might exploit his knowledge of ASA’s business operations for personal gain, such claims are entirely baseless. Kamrul is the architect of ASA’s successful business roadmap, and there is nothing for him to “steal.” Unfortunately, in Kamrul’s absence, ASA’s steady decline speaks volumes.

Restrictions on Kamrul’s Authority as President

While Kamrul was present during discussions concerning Board changes, his participation was pro forma at best. It became evident that his previously valued opinions were no longer welcome.

Business proposals from Kamrul, which could have propelled ASA to greater heights, were systematically dismissed with the assertion that such matters fell under the Board’s exclusive purview.

The independence mandated for the new ASA Board was compromised. Instead of fostering constructive debate, the Board operated as a mere rubber stamp for Mr. Dee and Amb. Cuisia’s decisions, leaving no room for dissenting views. Notably, Mr. Kamrul’s principled opposition to certain decisions became grounds for his removal. If the Board truly believed that removing Mr. Kamrul was in ASA’s best interest, how can it explain replacing the CEO three times within six months? Leadership instability clearly undermines the Foundation’s interests.

(To be continued)