Each depositor insured to at least $250,000 per insured bank



Home > Regulation & Examinations > Bank Examinations > FDIC Enforcement Decisions and Orders




FDIC Enforcement Decisions and Orders

ED&O Home | Search Form | Text Search | ED&O Help


{{4-30-99 p.C-4683}}
   [11,591] In the Matter of Sukamto Sia, Bank of Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii, Docket No. 98-105g (2-4-99)

   Respondent prohibited from participating in the conduct of affairs of, or exercising voting rights in, any insured institution without the prior written approval of the FDIC.

   [.1] Prohibition, Removal or Suspension—Prohibition From—Participation in Conduct of Affairs

In the Matter of
SUKAMTO SIA
a.k.a. SUKARMAN SUKAMTO,
individually, and as an institution-affiliated party of
BANK OF HONOLULU
HONOLULU, HAWAII
(Insured State Nonmember Bank)
ORDER OF SUSPENSION
AND PROHIBITION

FDIC-98-105g

   SUKAMTO SIA a.k.a. SUKARMAN SUKAMTO ("Respondent") has been advised of the right to receive a NOTICE AND ORDER OF SUSPENSION AND PROHIBITION ("NOTICE") issued by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") detailing the charges for which an ORDER OF SUSPENSION AND PROHIBITION ("ORDER") may issue, and has been further advised of the right to a hearing on the alleged charges under section 8(g) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act ("Act"), 12 U.S.C. §1818(g), and the FDIC's Rules of Practice and Procedure, 12 C.F.R. Part 308. Having waived those rights, the Respondent entered into a STIPULATION AND CONSENT TO THE ISSUANCE OF AN ORDER OF SUSPENSION AND PROHIBITION ("CONSENT AGREEMENT") with a representative of the Legal Division of the FDIC, whereby solely for the purpose of this proceeding and without admitting or denying any charges, Respondent consented to the issuance of an ORDER by the FDIC.
   The FDIC considered the matter and determined that it had reason to believe that:
   (a) The Respondent is an institution-affiliated party of the Bank of Honolulu, Honolulu, Hawaii ("Bank");
   (b) The Respondent has been charged in two separate criminal complaints filed by the State of Nevada on June 5, 1998 and September 23, 1998 with the commission of, or participation in, crimes involving dishonesty or breach of trust punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year; and
   (c) The continued service or participation by the Respondent in the conduct of the affairs of the Bank may pose a treat to the interests of the depositors of the Bank or may threaten to impair public confidence in the Bank.
   The FDIC, therefore, accepted the CONSENT AGREEMENT and issued the following:

ORDER OF PROHIBITION

   IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to the provisions of Section 8(g)(1) of the Act, 12 U.S.C. §1818(g)(1), and in accordance with Sections 8(e)(7) and 8(j) of the Act, 12 U.S.C. §§1818(e)(7) and 1818(j), that Respondent be, and hereby is:
   (1) Suspended as an institution-affiliated party of the Bank; and

   [.1] (2) Prohibited from further participation in any manner in the conduct of the affairs of the bank, or any other depository institution or organization listed in Section 8(e)(7)(A) of the Act, 12 U.S.C. §1818(e) (7)(A).
   The provisions of this ORDER will become effective immediately upon its issuance, and shall remain effective until terminated by the FDIC or until the final disposition of said criminal complaints.
   Pursuant to delegated authority.
   Dated at Washington, D.C., this 4th day of February, 1999.

ED&O Home | Search Form | Text Search | ED&O Help

Last Updated 6/6/2003 legal@fdic.gov