In an extraordinary turn of events, Singapore Post (SingPost) finds itself at the center of a major corporate governance crisis, following the abrupt termination of three senior executives. The group chief executive Vincent Phang, group chief financial officer Vincent Yik, and chief executive of the international business unit (IBU) Li Yu were dismissed with immediate effect on Sunday (Dec 22). An external review found them “grossly negligent” in handling an internal investigation stemming from a whistleblower’s report earlier this year.
This saga, now dubbed “Parcelgate,” raises serious concerns about SingPost’s corporate governance practices, transparency, and internal controls.
The Whistleblower’s Silence
One of the most startling revelations is the lack of disclosure about the whistleblower’s report itself. According to SingPost’s filing, the report implicated the company’s non-regulated international e-commerce logistics operations and was also forwarded to the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA). Yet, no mention of the whistleblower or the ensuing investigation appeared in SingPost’s 2024 annual report, published in June.
The Securities Investors Association (Singapore) (SIAS) has raised pointed questions, including when the board became aware of the whistleblower’s allegations and what safeguards were implemented to ensure accountability during the investigation.
Manual Overrides and Accountability Gaps
Central to the scandal are allegations that the dismissed executives allowed or approved manual updates to parcel delivery statuses. These updates marked parcels as “delivery failed” without any actual delivery attempts and lacked supporting documentation.
Stefanie Yuen Thio, joint managing partner at TSMP Law, questioned how such overrides could occur without adequate checks and balances. “Any manual override should require dual approvals and robust surveillance,” she emphasized.
SingPost has filed a police report against the dismissed individuals and pledged to conduct a comprehensive review of its operations. Yet, critics argue this response is insufficient, with corporate governance advocate Professor Mak Yuen Teen noting that this is SingPost’s third major scandal since 2005.
Corporate Culture in Question
The recurrence of controversies at SingPost – from governance lapses in 2015 to high-profile leadership departures in 2016 – suggests deeper cultural issues within the organization. “Culture is hard to develop and cascade through an organization,” Prof Mak observed, adding that such systemic problems may indicate a “toxic culture” exacerbated by financial pressures or unrealistic performance goals.
Opaque Dismissals and Missing Details
SingPost’s announcement provided little clarity on the exact nature of the executives’ misconduct. The trio was accused of failing to responsibly assess material facts and relying heavily on unverified representations from IBU staff. These missteps led to “serious misrepresentations” to the audit committee and compromised the group’s internal audit process.
Critics, however, are demanding more transparency. Robson Lee, a partner at Kennedys Legal Solutions, urged SingPost to disclose the full findings of its independent review, stating that the lack of detailed disclosure leaves investors and stakeholders in the dark.
Impact on the Market
The fallout from Parcelgate has been swift. SingPost’s shares plunged by over 10% to S$0.50 as of 1:22 PM on Dec 23, with 56 million securities traded. Financial institutions, including OCBC, have since lowered their target price for the stock.
The Road Ahead for SingPost
As the dust settles, many questions remain unanswered. How did these governance lapses occur, and what measures will SingPost implement to prevent a recurrence? The company has pledged to review its whistleblowing policies and operational safeguards, but investors and regulators will be watching closely.
For now, SingPost faces an uphill battle to restore trust and credibility in the wake of one of its most significant crises to date.
Thank you
