ACCA has 70,000 worldwide members and are not allowed to directly elect any officeholders. The ACCA is run on a colonial model with control resting in London. Rather than decentralizing and permitting members to run the local profession to meet local needs, ACCA's management has hoisted the International Assembly upon members. It has no powers and serves no purpose. Its membership is not entirely elected as the Head office appoints a number of its members. Some of the candidates (see below) for the 2000 election had prior relationship with ACCA management. There is no Register of International Assembly Members' interests. The ACCA management treats the Association as a private fiefdom and ensures that its stooges get elected.
ACCA management could not get enough people to come forward and stand for elections. Only six jurisdictions could hold elections. Members do not support the Assembly. 70,000 members were invited to vote at a cost of around £70,000. Only 2,200 voted. Due to special circumstances, the voting in Malaysia was heavy and accounted for 1,464 (67%) of all the votes cast.
Australia
Christopher Campbell
67 votes
James Woodward
62 votes
Malaysia
Abdul Rahim Hamid
891 votes
Yong Phie Loong
573 votes
Mauritius
Vinod Bussawah
293 votes
Deelchand Jeeha
48 votes
Middle East
Nasser al-Mugheiry
47 votes
M O A R Medani
39 votes
USA
Roy Castleton
71 votes
George Thomas
70 votes
Zimbabwe
Michael Gora
11 votes
George Varghese
7 Votes
The annual cost of hosting the International Assembly meeting, flight costs, hotels for Assembly members and their spouses adds up to more than £80,000. At a total cost of £150,000 the Assembly serves no useful purpose whatsoever. ACCA members can think of more useful ways of spending money!
Only a decentralized ACCA can enable members to run the Association
in their own interests. But the ACCA management is not going to let go.
How long will the non-Uk members continue to be treated as inferior and
accept the colonial rule from London?