CAL Bank Decision Hour

Main Topic | Threaded view | Expanded view

Shareholders of CAL Bank will this morning converge on the Ebenezer Presbyterian Church at Osu in Accra for an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) called by the second largest shareholder of the bank, Afare Apeadu Donkor.

The EGM will take decisions on the three resolutions proposed by Mr. Apeadu Donkor, Ghana's ambassador to China and former Managing Director of the bank.

Mr Apeadu Donkor with 11.05 percent shares, made the requisition for the EGM, seeking the removal of Frank Adu Jnr, Managing Director of the bank; an increase in the stated capital of the bank to GH¢100 million by 2012; and the election of Dr. Kobina Quansah, himself and Reginald Yoofi Grant as directors.

As of the end of February 28, 2008, the Social Security and National Insurance Trust (SSNIT) held the largest shares of 26.49 percent followed by Afare Donkor and Danny Ofori with 11.05 and 7.8 percent respectively.

Nominees Ltd/Renaissance Sec of Cyprus, Frank Adu Jnr, Vanguard Assurance Company Limited, BBGN/Barclays Capital Sec and Cayman Clients have 4.52, 2.64, 2.33, 1.14 percent respectively.

The remaining 44.08 percent shares are held by individual investors. In all, CAL Bank has 23,000 investors.

However, according to permutations, the ousting of the Managing Director could either go the way of Mr Apeadu Donkor or end in a split.

At the annual general meeting (AGM) held in March this year, three shareholders including SSNIT blocked a series of proposals put forward by the bank.

This generated a heated debate between the shareholders, management and board of the bank. It is expected that the EGM will generate more fireworks than the AGM.

Mr. Apeadu Donkor has stated categorically that the board and management of CAL Bank goofed during the AGM because they did not follow due corporate governance structures which is now the fundamental theme in corporate management, not only in Ghana but globally.

The unprecedented attempt to pass a resolution that would have led to the shareholders waiving their preemptive rights and hence the right of first refusal, by deleting Regulation 10 of the company's regulations and also to pass a resolution to offer shares as if the pre-emption provisions of the company did not apply, was wrong and fraudulent, he pointed out.

By Charles Nixon Yeboah