Request for review by the affiliated review body after the fund management headquarters decided yesterday’s approval
The headquarters decided to follow the decision, but the committee member left or resigned, etc.’painfulness’
[연합뉴스TV 제공]
(Seoul = Yonhap News) Reporter Shin Jae-woo and Park Won-hee = The National Pension Service is voting in favor of the reappointment of outside directors that will be presented at the Samsung Electronics shareholders’ meeting held on the 17th.
ISS, the world’s largest voting rights advisor, recommended the exercise of the opposing voting rights, and some members of the National Pension Trustee Responsibility Committee (Consignment Committee) composed of external experts requested re-discussion, but the approval policy was finalized.
The National Pension Fund Management Headquarters announced on the 16th that it will maintain the decision to agree to the re-election agenda of three outside directors of Samsung Electronics, including Seoul National University professor Park Byeong-guk, Kim Jong-hoon, chairman of Kisswemobile, and Kim Sun-wook, former head of the Ministry of Legislation.
The Fund Management Headquarters announced this decision the day before, but some members of the trustee, a voting authority under the headquarters, raised the need for reconsideration at the trustee level.
ISS, an advisory for voting rights, recommends’opposite’ to the reappointment of outside directors, saying, “We have failed to fulfill our responsibilities for checking and monitoring the management.” It was an opinion.
When it is necessary to exercise voting rights, the National Pension Service usually decides its opinion through the internal investment committee, and issues that are judged to have a significant impact on long-term shareholder value can be delegated to the trustee. Even if there is no delegation process, the entrusted committee can independently deliberate on major agendas at the request of more than one-third of the enrolled members (9 in total) and decide the direction of the voting rights.
As the three trustees requested that Samsung Electronics’ stockholders’ agenda be handed over to the trustee, the trustee debated whether it was necessary to reconsider the direction of voting rights, but the day before, it finally agreed to follow the decision of the fund management headquarters.
A number of entrusted committee members judged that deliberation and determination of matters determined by the Fund Management Headquarters and disclosed externally by the entrustment committee could undermine the credibility of the National Pension Service.
However, this decision came after the three members who requested the agenda were sent out.
Two of the three who requested a referral to the agenda, including lawyer Lee Sang-hoon (recommended by workers’ groups) and accountant Hong Sun-tak (recommended by local subscriber groups), pointed out problems in the national pension decision-making process, such as the exclusive decision of the Fund Management Division, and announced their intention to resign.
This is the first time that the Trustee has requested a re-discussion after the Fund Management Headquarters has decided on the direction of the voting rights and has made public announcements.
[연합뉴스TV 제공]
The Fund Management Headquarters said, “The internal investment committee decided on the direction of voting rights because it did not determine that it was’a matter to request a decision from the trustee because it is difficult to make a decision on its own with respect to the decision to exercise the voting rights at the shareholders’ meeting of Samsung Electronics. We will supplement the system regarding the deadline for requesting related procedures and agenda referrals.”
The National Pension Service also approves the re-election of three outside directors, as well as the re-election of three internal directors of Samsung Electronics, including Vice Chairman Kim Ki-nam.
However, the approval proposal for the ceiling on compensation for directors is expected to be opposed on the grounds that “the compensation limit level is excessive in relation to the compensation amount, or when the compensation limit level and compensation amount are excessive in view of the company’s size and management performance.”
Unauthorized reproduction-prohibition of redistribution>
2021/03/16 23:00 sent