Customize Consent Preferences

We use cookies to help you navigate efficiently and perform certain functions. You will find detailed information about all cookies under each consent category below.

The cookies that are categorized as "Necessary" are stored on your browser as they are essential for enabling the basic functionalities of the site. ... 

Always Active

Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.

No cookies to display.

Functional cookies help perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collecting feedback, and other third-party features.

No cookies to display.

Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics such as the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.

No cookies to display.

Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.

No cookies to display.

Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with customized advertisements based on the pages you visited previously and to analyze the effectiveness of the ad campaigns.

No cookies to display.

Banner Left
Banner Right

State corporations need board blacklist

State corporations need board blacklist

GOVERNMENT has been urged to set up a blacklist of people who should be prevented from serving as directors on the boards of State-owned corporations.

This is one of a number of recommendations made to improve “corporate governance” at parastatals, following the probe of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the Social Security Commission (SSC). “The [Commission] is of the view that a blacklist of delinquent board members, executive officers and financial managers be established.This record should be resorted to prior to an appointment in any State-owned enterprise, entity or statutory body,” the inquiry said in its report to President Sam Nujoma.The Commission identified “poor corporate governance at the SSC as one of the most prominent areas requiring attention”.Lack of communication between the board and management, insubordination towards the board, and the alleged poor performance of the chief executive officer were said to have contributed to weak administration of the institution.One example was the management’s refusal to accept that the board had refused a request to increase their car allowances, by 95 per cent in some cases.”It is apparent that the SSC Board was unable to ensure that the SSC management effectively implemented its decisions,” said the report.When the board gave in to the demands of management and “retrospectively” approved car allowances, the inquiry stated in the report that the board “was unable to effectively control and direct” the managers.In some case, said the commission of inquiry, one or two board members “irregularly assumed powers of the board”.After looking at the irregularities concerning the investments of millions of dollars at the SSC, the inquiry recommended that a law be made to allow for the “forfeiture of assets illegally obtained or used in the commission of a criminal offence, financial intelligence and corruption”.The report said cash was used to cover the money trail from ill-gotten investment deals.The commission generally proposed that Government should look broadly at the way other countries, such as South Africa, dealt with corporate governance issues.”The [Commission] is of the view that a blacklist of delinquent board members, executive officers and financial managers be established.This record should be resorted to prior to an appointment in any State-owned enterprise, entity or statutory body,” the inquiry said in its report to President Sam Nujoma.The Commission identified “poor corporate governance at the SSC as one of the most prominent areas requiring attention”.Lack of communication between the board and management, insubordination towards the board, and the alleged poor performance of the chief executive officer were said to have contributed to weak administration of the institution.One example was the management’s refusal to accept that the board had refused a request to increase their car allowances, by 95 per cent in some cases.”It is apparent that the SSC Board was unable to ensure that the SSC management effectively implemented its decisions,” said the report.When the board gave in to the demands of management and “retrospectively” approved car allowances, the inquiry stated in the report that the board “was unable to effectively control and direct” the managers.In some case, said the commission of inquiry, one or two board members “irregularly assumed powers of the board”.After looking at the irregularities concerning the investments of millions of dollars at the SSC, the inquiry recommended that a law be made to allow for the “forfeiture of assets illegally obtained or used in the commission of a criminal offence, financial intelligence and corruption”.The report said cash was used to cover the money trail from ill-gotten investment deals.The commission generally proposed that Government should look broadly at the way other countries, such as South Africa, dealt with corporate governance issues.

Stay informed with The Namibian – your source for credible journalism. Get in-depth reporting and opinions for only N$85 a month. Invest in journalism, invest in democracy –
Subscribe Now!

Latest News