Saica starts disciplinary proceedings against former Eskom CFO Anoj Singh

The South African Institute of Chartered Accountants has announced disciplinary proceedings against former Eskom CFO Anoj Singh.

Following a period of investigation, the professional body has decided to issue charges of misconduct against the chartered accountant, according to a statement issued by Saica.

According to Saica’s professional conduct committee or disciplinary committee, Singh is charged for conducting himself in a way that is “discreditable, dishonourable, dishonest, irregular or unworthy, or which is derogatory to the Institute, or tends to bring the profession of accountancy into disrepute”.

READ MORE: Singh, the shadow in the Molefe and Gupta scandals

Singh was also charged with failing to “maintain and adhere to the fundamental principles in the Saica Professional Code of Conduct for Chartered Accountants”.

In terms of the code of conduct, Singh is in contravention of several grounds.

Singh has 21 days to respond to Saica with a response to the charges. The Saica secretariat will then review the responses and table it for adjudication by the professional conduct committee.

The disciplinary hearing will take place once the details are confirmed, however these hearings are not open to the public, Saica said.

“Accused members appearing before the Professional Conduct Committee are not permitted legal representation,” the statement read.

If the committee is not pleased with Singh’s responses to the charges, it can impose a R250 000 fine per charge, suspend Singh from membership for not more than a year or refer a formal complaint to the Disciplinary Committee. Hearings before the disciplinary committee are open to the public at the chairperson’s discretion, Saica said.

READ MORE: How to eat a parastatal like Transnet – chunk by R600m chunk

Singh has been a member of Saica since January 2000. Saica had investigated Singh for improper conduct after the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse had laid a complaint against him in September 2017, Fin24 previously reported.

Saica explained that in terms of the code of conduct, Singh is in contravention of several grounds — integrity, objectivity, confidentiality and professional behaviour.

Saica said with regard to integrity, Singh failed to disclose to the Eskom board of directors the true reason for Tegeta’s request for R600-million from Eskom.

“Mr. Anoj Singh was knowingly associated with reports, returns, communications or other information where he knew or believed, or ought reasonably to have known, that the information contained a materially false or misleading statements; contained statements or information furnished recklessly; or omitted or obscured information required to be included where such omission or obscurity would be misleading.”

After becoming aware that he is associated with such information, he also failed to take steps to disassociate from the information, Saica explained.

With regard to objectivity, Singh compromised his professional or business judgement because of “bias, conflict of interest or the undue influence of others”. Singh was also found to have performed a professional service where “a relationship bias unduly influenced his professional judgement”.

Thirdly, Singh was in contravention of the principle of confidentiality when he disclosed confidential information he acquired from professional and business relationships without having the proper and specific authority to do so.

He also used the information to his personal advantage or the advantage of third parties.

READ MORE: Whistleblower outlines Eskom’s guide to milking state enterprises

“[He] failed to take reasonable steps to ensure that staff under his control and persons from whom advice and assistance is obtained respected his duty of confidentiality.”

Finally, Saica found that Singh’s professional behaviour was compromised when he failed to comply with relevant laws and regulations. He also failed to avoid conduct that he knew or should have known would discredit the accountancy profession.

“This includes conduct that a reasonable third party, weighing all the specific facts and circumstances available to him at that time, would be likely to conclude adversely affects the good reputation of the profession.”— Fin 24

We make it make sense

If this story helped you navigate your world, subscribe to the M&G today for just R30 for the first three months

Subscribers get access to all our best journalism, subscriber-only newsletters, events and a weekly cryptic crossword.”

Lameez Omarjee
Lameez Omarjee
Parliamentary reporter at Fin24.com

Related stories

WELCOME TO YOUR M&G

Already a subscriber? Sign in here

Advertising

Latest stories

Links between colleges, industry vital

Weak partnerships with industry and poor curriculum choices are among the factors driving unemployment among graduates

‘South Africa on a path to unjust transition’

The country needs a greener economy but energy specialists say policymakers must ensure the creation of a fairer economy in the process

Whistleblower helps SIU in diamonds corruption raid

The SIU alleges fraud and graft in state mining company's procurement

SA Mint launches rhino coin

The coins are produced in limited quantities ranging from 500 to 2 000, depending on the demand
Advertising

press releases

Loading latest Press Releases…
×