The suspension was based on "consultation with ASIC". As stated in the SOR, ASIC gave info to the ASX that they had concerns with ISX's books and records. In addition, ASIC also advised the ASX of their intention to launch a formal investigation into ISX. Based on ISX's own financial report we know that ASIC was at least investigating contravention of disclosure obligations, etc etc and we also know from what ISX submitted in court that ASIC are investigating the same matters as the ASX. So based on all of that, was the suspension fair and justified? Yes. Was there any element of any attempts to stifle competition in the reasonings? No. So why keep peddling the "conflict of interest" narrative? The narrative makes no logical sense whatsoever.
Now, as far as I am aware it is important to note that there is not even a cursory mention of any conflict of interest in ISX's statement of claims. It is also important to note that any mention of "conflict of interest" only happened after ISX had begun their court action.
Is Visa also trying to stifle competition? Didn't ISX say that they are going to refer Visa to ACCC or regulators, etc? Why are you people not pushing the narrative that Visa is trying to stifle ISX too because such such is a genius, etc etc??
