Corporations are defined as those companies which are registered with the Registrar Of Companies (ROC). Examples of corporations are Maybank Bhd, Sime Darby Bhd and Permanis Sdn Bhd. Associations, on the other hand, are those bodies registered with the Registrar Of Society (ROS).

Examples of associations are FAM, MCA, MTUC, RELA, etc.. These organisations mentioned are administered and controlled by a committee or a board of directors. The committee or the board would have various office bearers either elected or appointed.

Today, the nominations and elections of office-bearers of the above organisations are so intense that this sometimes leads to serious irregularities ie, fraud, applying dirty tactics, backstabbing etc. The more valauble the stake is, the more severe will be the battle.

The quest for power in corporations is not that intense since it is the norm that the right to vote would be based on shares held. This means the person with the most number of shares would be almost certain to be elected to the board and is deemed to have strong influence on the election of the other directors.

In associations, however, the quest for power is seen to be very intense. It is very much worse in the case of political parties. This is due to the fact that a certain Mr Nobody could easily become a VIP if he makes correct move at the correct time. A political leader, apart from having power in his political party, would also normally have power in the government and might have a considerable indirect influence in the corporate sector.

The bottom line is that irregularities and misdeeds in the election of office-bearers of the associations need to be curbed and be made more transparent before it reaches an uncontrolled critical level.

To my knowledge, the ROC and the ROS would receive minutes of the general meetings (AGMs and EGMs) and the list of office-bearers elected. Furthermore, both these governing bodies might send their officers as observers to such meetings.

My humble suggestion is that why not the ROS and ROC literally oversee the AGMs and EGMs? They also should conduct the elections of the organisations with the limited participation of the immediate past committee. This is to ensure that duress and undue influence are not used on the members with voting rights. The decision of the ROS and ROC team would be endorsed unless challenged in a court of law.

Of course, as part of the preparation to offset any negative eventualities, the meetings concerned should be held under the watchful eyes of an enforcement units ie. Rela, the police or the FRU and so on depending on the severity and the intensity of the meetings and elections.

The above suggestions are not only for national-level events but also for the lower levels. It should be noted that irregularities at the lower levels are rampant when compared to the top levels.

Yes, it would mean that the ROS and the ROC would need more manpower and funding. These two authorities could recruit the additional manpower needed and charge the associations or companies a reasonable fee for their role.

The fees charged may vary based on the level of AGMs and EGMs held. Let us hope that if the above is implemented, irregularities and misdeeds in associations and corporations would be cut down. Eventually, they will regain public trust and confidence.