He is charged with conducting himself in a manner which, “in the opinion of the Professional Conduct Committee or the Disciplinary Committee, is “discreditable, dishonourable, dishonest, irregular or unworthy, or which is derogatory to the institute, or tends to bring the profession of accountancy into disrepute; and/or that he failed to maintain and adhere to the fundamental principles in the Saica Professional Code of Conduct for Chartered Accountants”, a statement from the body said.
The charge sheet states that Singh failed to disclose to the Eskom board of directors the true reason for Tegeta's request of some R600m from the power utility. That he “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 explains.
Under the heading of objectivity, Saica says Singh “compromised his professional or business judgment because of bias, conflict of interest or the undue influence of others…. (and) performed a professional service where a relationship bias unduly influenced his professional judgment with respect to that service”.
Singh is believed to have disclosed confidential information acquired as a result of professional and business relationships without proper and specific authority to do so; used confidential information acquired as a result of professional and business relationships to his personal advantage or the advantage of third parties; and 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.
The fourth area of transgression against Singh pertains to professional behaviour. Here, Saica says he failed to comply with relevant laws and regulations and to avoid any conduct that he knew or should have known may 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.
In terms of the Saica by-laws, Singh has 21 days to respond to the charges. If Saica’s Professional Conduct Committee is not satisfied with the explanation or if none is forthcoming, the body has impose a fine of not more than R250,000 per charge, suspend the accused from membership for a period not exceeding 12 months or refer a formal complaint against the accused to the disciplinary committee.
