Board Independence, Related Party Lending and Whistleblower Protection
Zuma Microfinance Bank Plc is a listed company with seven directors. The chairman is a former managing director who retired two years ago; his two brothers also sit on the board. The managing director is the founder’s son. The audit committee is chaired by a director who also provides consulting services to the bank and receives ₦8m per year. In November 2024, the board approved a ₦250m loan to a company owned by the chairman’s wife without disclosing the relationship. The external auditor discovered the loan during the audit and reported it to the audit committee. A whistleblower wrote to the managing director alleging that the loan was used to buy shares in the bank. The managing director wants to dismiss the whistleblower and has asked the company secretary to keep the matter out of the board pack.
1. Identify the corporate governance weaknesses in the scenario and explain why each matters.
Read the worked answer
The board lacks independence. The chairman is a former managing director, two of his brothers are directors, and the managing director is the founder’s son. This concentration of family and former-management influence makes it difficult for independent directors to challenge decisions. The audit committee chair is not independent because he earns ₦8m per year as a consultant to the bank; this creates a self-review and self-interest threat and undermines the committee’s oversight of financial reporting and related party transactions. The ₦250m loan to a company owned by the chairman’s wife is a related party transaction that was approved without disclosure of the relationship. That breaches transparency, conflict-of-interest rules and the related party disclosure requirements of IAS 24; it may also breach CAMA 2020, SEC rules and the Nigerian Code of Corporate Governance. The board’s approval without independent review is a control failure. The managing director’s reaction to the whistleblower is also a governance weakness because it discourages the reporting of wrongdoing and exposes the bank to retaliation and concealment risk.
2. Advise the company secretary on the ethical and legal issues raised by the managing director’s instruction.
Read the worked answer
The company secretary should not comply with the instruction to keep the matter out of the board pack or to dismiss the whistleblower. The company secretary owes duties to the company, not to the managing director personally, and must act honestly, in good faith and in the best interests of the company. Suppressing a material related party transaction and a whistleblowing allegation could amount to a breach of statutory duties, obstruct the board’s oversight and expose the company secretary to personal liability. The whistleblower is protected under the company’s whistleblowing policy and applicable corporate governance rules; retaliation could expose the bank and the managing director to legal and regulatory action. The company secretary should document the instruction, report the matter to the board and the audit committee, and seek independent legal advice. The matter should be included in the board pack with a conflicts disclosure. The company secretary should also ensure that the whistleblower’s identity is protected and that an independent investigation is commissioned.
3. Recommend the actions the board should take to address the related party loan and strengthen governance.
Read the worked answer
The board should establish an independent committee of directors who have no relationship with the chairman to investigate the ₦250m loan, including its purpose, approval, terms, security and use of proceeds. The chairman should recuse himself from all discussions and decisions on the matter. The loan should be disclosed as a related party transaction in the financial statements, with the relationship, amount, terms and outstanding balance, and the board should consider whether it should be recovered or regularised. The matter should be reported to the relevant regulators, including the Central Bank of Nigeria as the microfinance bank regulator and the Securities and Exchange Commission as the capital market regulator, subject to legal advice. The board should reconstitute the audit committee so that the chair is independent and the consultant-director is removed from oversight of the bank’s finances. It should separate the roles of chairman and managing director, appoint more independent directors, adopt and enforce a whistleblowing policy with non-retaliation protections, and provide training on conflicts of interest and related party transactions.