The Integrity Commission needs to go beyond publishing the names of defaulters

Corporate reporting focuses mainly on financial information that does not give a full picture of an organsation’s true value for the benefit of investors and other stakeholders. There is therefore an accountability gap. This is according to an article by Alexis See Tho appearing in ‘CFO Innovation’.

 ( Tho went on to state that across Asia, an increasing number of organisations are implementing integrating reporting which recognizes the six capitals or resources that create value for an organization and its stakeholders. These are financial capital, manufactured capital, intellectual capital, human capital, natural capital, and social and relationship capital. In Japan, for example, 341 listed companies in Japan are publishing integrated reports as of 2017, while in Malaysia, some 60 companies have started to do so, according a survey by KPMG.  This new approach to corporate reporting is in line with the King IV Report on Corporate Governance published in November 2016, as discussed in our articles of 26 March and 2 April 2018.

The Integrity Commission has been in the news over the last few weeks. Since the appointment of Commissioners in February 2018, it has been publicizing the names of persons who have failed to submit their financial declarations with the Commission. Such declarations include income, assets and liabilities of the persons involved as well as those of their spouses and children. However, this is a basic task that requires comparing the list of persons required to make submissions to the Commission and compiling the list of defaulters. The Commission therefore needs to do more than this if it is to play any meaning role in preventing and fighting corruption in government…..

Around the Web