Independent or irrelevant directors?
Independence of these three Swiber directors is debatable.
DeeperDive is a beta AI feature. Refer to full articles for the facts.
SWIBER'S tardy disclosures, sudden announcement of a winding-up application, mass resignations of executive directors, reversal of its winding-up application and retraction of a resignation announcement have befuddled and angered investors. Singapore Exchange's chief regulatory officer has - quite rightly - said that there will be investigations and regulatory actions may be taken.
When Swiber won in the small-cap category of the Singapore Corporate Governance Award in 2012, its group chief executive Francis Wong had this to say: "... We also continue to review our processes to improve each aspect of corporate governance to be in line with best practices. Swiber's board is mindful of the interests of its stakeholders ... Swiber will continue to be a steward of excellent corporate governance practices across its operations."
Swiber's approach to corporate governance disclosures and practices has not changed much over the years, and, given the recent events, those words ring hollow now.
Share with us your feedback on BT's products and services
TRENDING NOW
Shelving S$5 billion office redevelopment plan proved ‘wise’ as geopolitical risks mount: OCBC chairman
Why where you park your joint venture matters: Lessons from a US$689 million shareholder dispute
China pips the US if Asean is forced to choose, but analysts warn against reading it like a sports result
Singaporeans can now buy record amount of yen per Singdollar