| 
		Does India need an act like Sarbanes-Oxley? By Dr. Anurika Vaish Divisional Head (MBA-IT and MSCLIS) IIIT, Allahabad 
 Prince Agarwal & Shivi Tyagi MBA-IT (Batch: 09-11) 
	 IIIT, Allahabad 
 
 Corporate governance and ethics are the corner 
	stones of sound business environment. These ingredients have often made us 
	realize their worth, as we have encountered blunders shaking public 
	confidence in security markets. In lieu of such events, there arises a need 
	to frame and implement laws which can safeguard the public interests and lay 
	down the foundation of a secure market. In response to such critical issues, 
	the government has to play a very crucial role and has to come ahead with 
	laws and acts so as to exercise control and maintain creditability. Enron is 
	one such instance of fraud, which has led to birth of a new act. Enron, a 
	natural gas selling company established in 1985 and seventh largest company 
	on Fortune 500 before it collapsed, plunged into energy markets, and gained 
	popularity among investors and drove stock prices up. It underwent expansion 
	program, entering into internet services, investment into new ventures, 
	increased borrowings, and then  to veil the debts, came into being as 
	partnership, ‘Chewco investments’. The duo kept $600 million in debts off of 
	the books, and thus dilusioned the government and the people who owned the 
	Enron stock. December 2000, Enron claimed to have tripled its profit in two 
	years. Arthur Andersen Houston, the auditors, was equally responsible in the 
	breach of public interest by certifying the company’s financial statements 
	and hiding $1 billion losses. Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) ordered a 
	probe, following which Enron admitted to have overstated the profits for the 
	past four years by $586 million and the debts stood at almost $6 billion. 
	The stock plummeted and Enron had to repay the money to the investors, 
	unable to do so it declared for section 11 bankruptcy. Following the similar 
	kind of pattern were Tyco International, Adelphia, Peregrine Systems and 
	WorldCom. In response to such corporate and accounting 
	scandals, the US federal body incorporated a Public Company Accounting 
	Reform and Investor Protection Act, 2002, which came to be known as 
	Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) of 2002. It was named after U.S. Senator Paul 
	Sarbanes and U.S. Representative Michael G. Oxley and President George W. 
	Bush signed it. The legislation lays down enhanced standards for all U.S. 
	public company boards, management and public accounting firms but does not 
	apply to private firms. The act includes 11 titles,  
 
	When the American energy multinational Enron Corp 
	collapsed, none would have thought that similar things were also cooking up 
	at the same time at Satyam Computers, India’s fourth largest software 
	services exporter and the first Indian company to be listed on three 
	international stock exchanges Mumbai, New York & Amsterdam. The image of 
	Indian Corporate was doubted when Satyam’s chairman B. Ramalinga Raju 
	confessed of over inflating the value of cash and bank balances by Rs. 50.4 
	bn, understating the liabilities by Rs. 1230 crores along with non-existent 
	accrued interest of Rs. 376 crores. This in fact was a wake up call for 
	India, to look into the quality of financial information that is put across 
	the public. Experts and industry watchers stand divided, as to how such a 
	debacle has made promoters sit up and make alterations or nothing has 
	changed in real sense of term. Moreover the issue also questioned the 
	responsibility of the Auditing firms who are liable for the assurance that 
	the financial disclosures are fair enough to rely upon. The "Clause 49" of 
	the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) focuses across the 
	corporate universe and pertains to corporate governance and lies down that 
	at least one-third of the board must consist of independent directors with 
	stronger audit standards and better financial disclosure norms. But such an 
	imbroglio shows that clause 49 had not that radical effect in preventing 
	misgovernance. To what an extent the external auditor can be ‘independent’ 
	to opine on the management report? How comfortable the management is with 
	disclosure protocols? Are some of the questions which prove to be a 
	constraint for the law.  
 
 
 
 
	1.   
	
	http://www2.sa.unibo.it, retrieved on 18-8-2009 
	2.  
	
	http://www.icai.org, retrieved on 18-8-2009 
	3.  
	
	http://www.valuenotes.com, retrieved on 18-8-2009 
	4.  
	
	http://www.wikipedia.org, retrieved on 18-8-2009 |