| Hony.
Editor |
|
Dr.
Bindi Mehta
(Director,
Research at ICSI - CCRT, Formerly, Chief economist, CRISIL |
|
   
   
   
    |
|
National
Events |
| Corporate
fraud faces equal fine |
| The
Shradul Shroff Committee, constituted
by the Department of Company Affairs (DCA)
to suggest measures against erring corporates,
is set to recommend that the fine for
irregularities should be equal to the
magnitude of the frauds. As of now, for
listed companies, a breach of clause 49
of the listing agreement of the Securities
and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), which
specifies corporate governance norms,
attracts a small fine of Rs.1000 under
the Securities Contract Regulation Act.
The
five-member committee would submit its
final report to the DCA by this month-end.
The report is likely to recommend more
teeth for the National Company Law Tribunal
by vesting it with criminal jurisdiction.
This would mean speedy justice, as there
would be no need to refer the cases to
district courts. The committee is also
of opinion that a company should not be
held responsible for its employees’ irregularities.
According
to committee sources, if a major offence
is grave and affected a large number of
people, the guilty will face a five-year
imprisonment, in addition to the fine.
The emphasis, however, would be on fines
than prison terms, the sources added.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
SEBI
seen easing grip even as SEC tightens norms |
|
The SEBI had directed the stock exchanges on August 26, to amend
clause 49 of the Listing Agreement requiring all listed companies
to reconstitute their board and audit committees with certain
prescribed number of independent directors. It has also prescribed
qualifications for a director to be considered independent.
The
SEBI-directed changes to the Listing Agreement are to take effect
from April 1, 2004 while the SEC-approved changes in the listing
manuals of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and Nasdaq to strengthen
corporate governance have to be implemented before October 31,
2004.
The
new Clause 49 is very similar to the new corporate governance
rules of the NYSE and Nasdaq listing manuals. For instance, as
provided by the Clause 49 of the Listing Agreement, the SEC-approved
rules will require all companies listed on NYSE and Nasdaq to
comply with provisions on independence of directors on the board
and audit committees.
Go
to top
|
SEBI
unveils listing norms for debt issues |
|
SEBI has come
out with a new model listing agreement for debt issues. This follows
its recent circular asking companies to list their debt issues
on stock exchanges. The new model norms will require all listed
companies to make disclosures as per the Companies Act and sign
a separate listing agreement with stock exchanges. SEBI has come
out with new norms to curb the private placement market, which
is largely unregulated. The norms are intended to spur the development
of a secondary market for corporate bonds.
Bond
issuers will have to agree to comply with clearing and settlement
norms of exchanges. They are also required to fix and notify exchanges
at least 21 days in advance of the date on and from which the
interest on debentures and bonds and their redemption payments
will be payable. The issuer will have to furnish to the exchanges,
after each AGM, details of the top 50 holders of each class of
security along with particulars such as the number of securities
held and address of each holder. They will also have to obtain
‘in-principle’ approval for listing from the exchange before issuing
further securities.
Go
to top
|
Murthy
Panel to ease restrictions on IPO proceeds |
The Narayana
Murthy Committee on corporate governance, set up by SEBI, has
firmed up amendments to Clause 49 of the Listing Agreement.
Final discussions on the proposed amendments were held at a
meeting on November 17, 2003, in Mumbai and the report is expected
to be made public next month.
The Committee
proposes amendments with regard to disclosures relating to the
utilization of IPO proceeds, deletion of the clause concerning
contingent liability and rationalization of clauses linked with
independent directors.
According
to sources, the current provisions in the Clause 49 require
companies to disclose use of IPO proceeds without specifying
any time limit. The proposed amendment wants such disclosure
to be made to the audit committee only till such time that IPO
proceeds have been fully spent.
Provisions
of the listing agreement dealing with disclosures about contingent
liabilities are proposed to be deleted. This is being done to
prevent duplication. Such disclosures already covered by Schedule
VI of the Companies Act.
A slew of
measures rationalizing provisions related with independent directors
have also been proposed. As far as tenure of independent directors
is concerned, a limit of nine years is proposed. If a person
continues to be a director beyond that term, he/she will be
deemed to be a non-executive director. The amendments do not
propose any term limit for non-executive directors.
|
Government
may back SEBI ombudsman plan for fast grievance redressal |
The ombudsman scheme formulated by SEBI to redress investor grievances
swiftly is to be operationlised soon with the government set to
approve it. The ombudsman scheme was mooted by SEBI earlier this
year and notified a couple of months ago as the SEBI (ombudsman)
Regulations. The operationalising of the office of the ombudsman
is expected shortly with the government considering setting up
of ombudsmen in several regional centers on the lines of the banking
industry.
The
Joint Parliamentary Committee which probed the ’01 securities
scam had also recommended steps to help investors to claim damages,
compensation and interest. The office of the ombudsman will be
located in Mumbai. The SEBI ombudsman will handle grievances of
investors relating to non-receipt of refund orders, allotment
letters for public issue of securities / units of mutual funds
or collective investment schemes, non-receipt of share certificates,
unit certificates, debenture certificates, interest on debentures,
delayed refund, non-transfer of securities and any grievance relating
to public rights or bonus issues or non-receipt of letter for
take-over, buy-back of shares or de-listing of shares.
SEBI
reckons that an alternative redressal mechanism which is cheap,
efficient, fast and informal is in order. Its ombudsman regulations
say that an investor can approach the ombudsman only after written
representation to a listed company or intermediary is rejected
or when the investor does not receive any response from the company
or intermediary within a month.
The
SEBI board is empowered to appoint one or more ombudsmen. The
selection panel for appointing ombudsmen will include a retired
high court judge and an expert on financial markets besides a
representative of SEBI not below the rank of an executive director.
SEBI
has said that the present mechanism of either suspending or canceling
the registration of intermediaries or imposition of a monetary
penalty does not fully redress the grievance of investors. Hence
the need to have an ombudsman.
Go
to top
|
NBFCs
form self-regulatory body
|
A self-regulatory
organisation, called the Finance Industry Development Council
(FIDC), for overseeing the interests of the non-banking financial
companies was announced on Friday at the 19th National Convention
of the Federation of Indian Hire Purchase Associations (FIHPA),
hosted by the Kolkata based Hire Purchase and Lease Association.
The FIDC,
once fully operational, will act as the voice of the NBFC sector
from a single platform and represent the industry in dialogues
with the Reserve Bank of India and the Government on the various
issues plaguing the sector. The council will be headquartered
in Mumbai, with full-fledged regional chapters in the major
metros. Once the registration process was through, preparation
of memorandum and articles of association, code of conduct,
membership structure etc., would be completed within the next
two or three months. He said the FIDC should start functioning
by February 2004. The first meeting of the core group, comprising
heads of the three main industry associations, was held on September
27, 2003. Mr. Mahesh Thakkar, Executive Director of ALFS, said
a lot of stress would be laid on the self-regulatory aspect
to make the body a true success. He said the majority membership
would comprise the small outfits whose interests would have
to be fully protected.
Go
to top
|
Govt.
nod for unlisted companies sweat equity to be mandatory |
The Government’s approval will soon become mandatory for the issuance
of sweat equity by unlisted companies beyond a specified level.
The
Department of Company Affairs (DCA) proposes to impose this restriction
in cases where unlisted companies are looking at issuing such
shares aggregating more than 15 per cent of the total paid-up
equity capital in a year or shares of the value of Rs. 5 crore,
whichever is higher.
The
restriction is to be defined in the proposed rules for unlisted
companies for issuance of sweat equity shares.
‘Sweat
equity shares’ as per the Companies Act, are equity shares issued
by a company to employees or directors at a discount or for consideration
other than cash for providing know-how or making available rights
in the nature of intellectual property rights or value additions.
(Source:
Business Line-Dec 4, 2003)
Go
to top
|
Companies
can offer equity against all ECBs |
|
The government has permitted Indian Companies
to issue equity shares against all types of external commercial
borrowings (ECBs).
Earlier
in July, the Government had permitted partial conversion of ECBs
for those loans that have already become due for repayment.
Today’s
announcement permits Indian companies to “issue equity shares
against all ECBs (excluding those deemed as ECBs) received in
convertible foreign currency, subject to meeting all tax liabilities
and procedures.”
The
types of ECBs that are eligible for such conversion include commercial
bank loans, buyer’s credit, suppliers’ credit, securitised instruments,
credit form official export credit agencies, commercial borrowings
from the private sector window of multilateral financial institutions,
as well as investment by foreign institutional investors in dedicated
debt funds.
(Source:
Business Line-Dec 4, 2003)
Go
to top
|
‘Secuirities
audit’ proposed for better compliance of laws |
|
The Institute of Company Secretaries of India
(ICSI) has mooted the concept of ‘Securities Audit,’ given the
need for a mechanism to ensure better compliance of statutory
provisions relating to securities by a company.
The
institute has evolved the ‘Securities management and compliances’
model to allow companies to function in conformity with various
laws. “Once the securities have come into existence, the transactions
in the securities are also government by various acts, rules and
regulations. This concept is a step towards introducing “Securities
Audit” in companies,” ICSI President, Mr. Pavan Kumar Vijay, said.
“With
the changing times and enhanced responsibility of company secretaries,
the responsibility of secretarial function has also increased.
This encompasses compliance of laws applicable to a company as
well as adherence to good corporate governance practices and thus,
wider scope of secretarial audit,” Mr Vijay pointed out.
The
objective behind securities management is to assess compliance
by an issuer company of securities related laws and capital market
regulations. And the objective behind secretarial audit is to
report on the compliance of applicable laws and corporate governance
norms by a company. “The institute is in the process of developing
a module on secretarial audit including background information,
standard format of secretarial audit report, guidance notes, and
checklists,” the President said. The audit includes issuance of
both debt and equity securities by companies.
Further,
the concept of secretarial audit comes at a time when the capital
market regulator, Securities & Exchange Board of India (SEBI),
has become more vigilant and disclosure norms are being tightened.
Further, any initial public offering (IPOs) has to undergo severe
scrutiny before they tap the market, he said.
Elaborating
on the broad coverage of secretarial audit, Mr. Vijay said, “it
would cover the corporate governance norms, board independence,
board systems and procedures, transparency and disclosures compliances,
consistent shareholders value enhancements, stakeholders value,
corporate social responsibility and sustainability.”
Secretarial
audit will not only help the company but also the independent
directors since the responsibility of whether the information
furnished by a company is correct or not will lie with the company
secretary, the President stated.
In
fact, the institute proposes to submit the concept paper on Securities
Management and Companies and Secretarial Audit to the capital
market regulator
(Source:
Business Line, Dec 22, 2003)
Go
to top
|
|
© 2001 Academy of Corporate Governance |
|