Comparison Between UK and Pakistan Corporate Governance Code – Assignment of Corporate Governance
Assignment:
Board rooms in the corporate sector of UK and Pakistan present very different approaches with regard to composition and practices. Being the student of corporate governance critically analysis comparatively both systems.
Identify what are the best practices in the both systems and give your opinion how Pakistani board of directors can be made more efficient.
Guidelines:
- It should be in precise manner and properly bound.
- Element of originality will not be compromised AND COPY PASTE IS NOT ALLOWED.
- It should be formatted as
Paper Size: A4
Left Margin: 1 Inch
Right Margin: 1 Inch
Top Margin: 1 Inch
Bottom Margin: 1 Inch
Font: Times New Roman
Font Size:
- Main Heading 14
- Sub Heading 12
- Text 12
- Titles 16
Font Color: Black
Line Spacing: 1.5
- Title page must be designed according to your own will but should have essential information
Comparison between UK and Pakistan Corporate Governance Code
| Pakistan Corporate Governance code | UK Corporate Governance |
| 1.Structure Of board: Pakistan is unitary Board system. While Islamic banking companies have dual system. 2.Non Executive Directors: In Pakistan at least one senior non executive director. 3.Appointment of Board of directors: In Pakistan by election, appointment by the creditor, the appointment by the government, the appointment by the foreign equity holder appoints the board. 4.Executive Directors: In Pakistan not exceed 75 percent board including CEO and other companies and in banking sector not exceed 25 percent executive directors. 5. Remuneration of Directors: In Pakistan remuneration in the form of express agreement also mentioned in prospectus, the remuneration paid by capital, and determines the remuneration at the annual general meeting in accordance with Article. 6.Committees: In Pakistan only one audit committee exist. 7. Qualification and Eligibility: In Pakistan’s Director serves more than ten listed company. If any director not have tax number which cannot be chosen as a nominee director. | UK is also unitary board system. While on the other hand in UK half of the director is non executive director. While in UK nomination committee appointment of directors. While in UK half of the board is consist of directors. In the UK there should be a formal and transparent procedure for developing remuneration policy for executive directors and for fixing the remuneration of non-executive director person are involved in deciding his own remuneration. While in UK 4 types of committees like Audit Committee, remuneration committee, nomination committee, risk committee. In the UK the director can be disqualified from being a company director, if the director does not meet legal responsibilities. Director may be disqualified from being a director of a company, if an insolvency practitioner or a member of the director of public reports conducted by inadequate. |
Best practices in Pakistan and UK board
Position of Director:
In Pakistan and the UK as director is the same in Pakistan and the UK. Director may be as agent, trustee, governor, managing partner.
Board of director:
In Pakistan and UK board of director elected by shareholders.
Duties Of directors:
Director’s duty to act within the powers and promote the success of the company in the UK and Pakistan.
The directors of the both countries to exercise reasonable care, skill, and to avoid conflicts of interest.
Recommendations:
We are comparison of UK and Pakistan Corporate governance but in Pakistan governance system many problems. So, I suggest some points which is given below.
- Improve the internal control system especially Pakistan should these practices.
- Board of directors does not misuse of powers.
- Pakistan should be strict check and balance.
- Number of non executive should be increase so, that Individual decision does not influence.
- Notice of Meeting is necessary before the time so, that directors attend meeting timely.
- Fine should be increase from 10,000.
- Board of directors should avoid developing fiduciary relationship.