Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Since the early 1990’s, corporate responsibility issues including the social obligations of
corporations have attained prominence in political and business debate. This is mainly in
response to corporate scandals but also due to the realisation that development centred
only on economic growth paradigms is unsustainable and therefore there is a need for a
more pro-active role by states, companies and communities in a development process
aimed at balancing economic growth with environmental sustainability and social
cohesion.
History continues to tick and Sarbanes-Oxley Act of the US was a serious wakeup call. It
has been much debated and there are very mild protests in some quarters. Nevertheless,
it is a call to get back to fundamentals and it identifies 58 separate provisions that affect
internal auditing and the question of Directors of Boards looking the other way is
unacceptable and must change. This message is applicable to the public and private
companies alike. I am tempted to quote some of the important extracts from the BIS
review 2003.
• The message for boards of directors is: Uphold your responsibility for
ensuring the effectiveness of the company’s overall governance process.
• The message for audit committees is: Uphold your responsibility for
ensuring that the company’s internal and external audit processes are rigorous
and effective.
• The message for CEOs, CFOs, and the senior management is : Uphold
your responsibility to maintain effective financial reporting and disclosure
controls and adhere to high ethical standards. This requires meaningful
certifications, codes of ethics, and conduct of insiders that, if violated, will
result in fines and criminal penalties, including imprisonment.
• The message for external auditors is: Focus your efforts solely on auditing
financial statements and leave the add-on services to other consultants
• The message for internal auditors is: You are uniquely positioned within
the company to ensure that its corporate governance, financial reporting and
disclosure controls, and risk management practices are functioning
effectively. Although internal auditors are not specifically mentioned in the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act, they have within their purview of internal control the
responsibility to examine and evaluate all of an entity’s systems, processes,
operations, functions and activities.
Thus, the role of the internal auditor has substantially got escalated and the external
auditor perhaps took a back seat. However, a specific section of Sarbanes-Oxley Act
requires senior management to assess and report on the effectiveness of disclosure
controls and procedures as well as on internal controls for financial reporting. All of
these have to be in the public disclosure domain of the reports but outside the financial
statements. There is one risk to merely lean heavily on the certification, which after a
while become ritualistic. It would be good to be associated with the framing of the robust
audit programme and the company’s disclosure control framework. Further an internal
auditor must have the highest ethics and be willing to sacrifice everything (consultation
assignments) to maintain their independence within the auditing company. If there are
different sections of companies, which offer turn-key management consultation, at least
those who are involved in the audit exercise should disassociate themselves from being a
part of consulting side of the company’s work. Some of the provisions in the Act are
quite draconian particularly one would be the internal auditor of publicly traded financial
services company, as there are threats of fines and imprisonment, the internal auditor’s
voice is heard loud and clear by the Board and as such all those Boards who choose to
ignore this valuable advice would in my opinion be consigned to the dust bin of history.
Complex collapses, misfeasance and malfeasance of staggering proportions, Auditors
failing in their duties, call for tough Regulatory responses like the above Act and related
rules introduced and interpreted by Securities and Exchange Commission in USA.
Indian Situation:
Next I would like to turn to Indian situation. By and large we have followed the Cadbury
model. It is true that Audit Committees, Managing Committees and Remuneration
Committees have all come into existence. In most Indian companies and the CIIs studies
of 1999 chaired by Mr. Kumara Mangalam Birla was a landmark document with 25
recommendations 19 of them which are ‘mandatory’. The roles of a company with a
combination of Executive and Non-Executive Directors with atleast 50% comprising
non-executive directors is important. Likewise, the audit committee is chaired by
qualified independent Director preferably a Chartered Accountant and the members of
the Audit Committee are invariably non-executive independent Directors. We all know
that the independent Directors apart from receiving Director’s remuneration, do not have
any pecuniary relationship or transactions with the company. The Audit Committee has
wide powers and also looks into the compliance with Accounting Standards and all of the
other regular compliances like the stock exchange, legal requirements and it also looks
into several internal control systems. There is sub-committee of the Board, which also
looks at the shareholders’ grievances and files its compliances to the stock
exchange. Publication of quarterly or half yearly results of the companies after being
vetted by the Audit Committee is now a well established practice. What perhaps is
missing in the Indian situation at the present moment is the equivalent legislation, inline
with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act although, the dust has not settled down on the subject. The
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India have set up quite rigid Accounting Standards
to be followed which have progressively tightened compliances. This assumes
importance as many mid-sized and small companies are family controlled and at times
pyramidical structures are developed so that layered investments and crossholdings go
unnoticed. There is urgency to ensure against controlling of companies in the group by a
group of people who are not direct investors.
The Basel Committee in the year 1999, had brought out certain important principles on
corporate governance for banking organizations which, more or less have been adopted in
India.
Basel committee underscores the need for banks to set strategies for their operations. The
committee also insists banks to establish accountability for executing these
strategies. Unless there is transparency of information related to decisions and actions it
would be difficult for stakeholders to make managements accountable. The underlying
theme is accountability at all levels including the Boards.
From the perspective of banking industry, corporate governance also includes in its ambit
the manner in which their boards of directors govern the business and affairs of
individual institutions and their functional relationship with senior management. This is
determined by how banks:
There are four important aspects of oversight that should be included in the
organizational structure of any bank in order to ensure the appropriate checks and
balances:
It is found that in a number of countries, bank boards have found it beneficial to establish
certain specialized committees. Let us look at a few of them:
Companies worldwide are increasingly worried about the impact of their business
activities on society. Many have created so-called corporate social responsibility (CSR)
programmes that aim to balance their operations with the concerns of external
stakeholders such as customers, unions, local communities, NGOs and governments.
Social and environmental consequences are weighed against economic gains.
“Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility are both extremely important
to a company. But it is not a natural thing to separate them. If you have a well formed
corporate governance programme in place, which would probably take care of most CSR
issues.
According to OECD the Corporate Governance structure specifies the distribution of
rights and responsibilities among different participants in the corporation, such as, the
Board, managers, shareholders and other stakeholders spells out the rules and procedures
for making decisions on corporate affairs.
I would like to mention the structure of CG (corporate governance)
The current theory of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is developing along three
interwoven lines moral, social, and environmental. Although everybody recognizes that
although CSR is of growing concern in a globalised economy, it being at the top of the
board of director's agenda and also good for business, there is no sign of consensus on its
rules, structures, or procedures. Now, this collection of essays by leading jurists,
businesspeople, and academics takes a giant step toward a more cohesive and durable set
of principles that can contribute to a cleaner environment and a better society while
respecting and protecting the interests of all stakeholders.
The authors approach this complex but critical subject from a variety of perspectives,
including the following:
• the role of CSR in corporate governance;
• the legal enforceability of CSR rules;
• the impact of international human rights standards; CSR as part of
corporate DNA;
• choice of CSR strategy defensive or offensive;
• the need for fair competition between developing country exporters;
• the prospects for international social protection for workers;
• enforcement of minimal standards in remote locations;
• the active search for eco-efficient solutions;
• corporate assumption of human rights responsibilities; and
• the legal weight of codes of conduct
• the role of the lawyer in CSR.
In a world where the annual income of the five largest business corporations is more than
double the combined GNPs of the 50 poorest countries, the need for meaningful
standards of corporate social responsibility should be obvious. The well-informed and
considered analyses in this remarkable volume provide an excellent starting point for
those anxious to move the agenda forward in this area that, despite the efforts of many
companies, often seems so intractable. The book will be of immeasurable value to all
professionals and academics in relevant fields of law, policy, and business.