CBK clashes with Imperial Bank shareholders over disclosure

 

The Central Bank of Kenya and Imperial Bank Limited shareholders have disagreed on whether to publish the bank’s financial statements over the time it has been in receivership and a forensic audit on what led to the lender’s collapse.

The shareholders argue that they need the information to be able to effectively participate in the planned revival of the bank but CBK has said the shareholders have enough information to make the necessary decisions.

The clash follows a plan to revive the bank through an expression of interest (EOI), an extension of the receivership by a year, and a requirement for the shareholders to pump in money to assist in its re-opening.

In a letter to Central Bank dated July 20, the shareholders, through Wandabwa Advocates, said by not publishing the bank’s financial statements as well as the forensic audit undertaken by FTI Consulting, CBK was being an obstacle to its reopening.

“The financial status of Imperial Bank Limited (IBL), if already established, be shared with all the stakeholders, including my clients, forthwith,” said the letter.

“If the said status has not been determined, then the same be established conclusively within the next two weeks (being the period proposed to establish a data room for the potential investors interested in the EOI), and subsequently shared with the stakeholders, including my clients.”

No bearing

In response, CBK and the Kenya Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC), through Murgor and Murgor Advocates, said the bank shareholders had been furnished with adequate information and more would be made available on a need-to-know basis.

“The forensic audit has no bearing on the extension of the receivership. Any information to be provided to your clients will be done as and when it is necessary, and as provided by law,” said the lawyers.

Provisional statement

“In any event, CBK and KDIC supplied your clients with a provisional statement of affairs in the meeting held on June 2, 2017,” they added.

The letter notes that the requirements made by the shareholders were contrary to agreements previously reached between the parties involved in attempts to reopen the bank that was placed in receivership for 12 months in October 2015.

This period was extended by another 12 months, which lapse in September this year.