On 30 and 31 August 2023 a Disciplinary Committee of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (“CIPFA”) heard allegations against CIPFA Affiliate member Mr Mohammad Nazmul Huda.
Disciplinary Committee Attendance
Mr Huda did not attend his hearing and was not represented in his absence.
Although he had previously engaged with CIPFA ‘s regulatory process, Mr Huda had not engaged since April 2022. The Committee confirmed that it would take into account the earlier communications received from Mr Huda.
In all of the circumstances, the Committee agreed to proceed in Mr Huda’s absence.
The Disciplinary Committee Hearing
Mr Huda became a CIPFA Affiliate member in about April 2019. His affiliate membership of CIPFA was granted via a Memorandum of Understanding with another membership body, Body A.
Mr Huda was later granted “full” qualified Accountancy Membership of CIPFA based on his membership of another Accountancy Body, Body B. His membership of Body B had been granted to him by virtue of a Memorandum of Understanding between Body B and another Accountancy Body, Body C.
In or about June 2021, Mr Huda applied for membership of Body D through a Mutual Recognition agreement between CIPFA and Body D. To be eligible for entry to Body D through this route Mr Huda was required to have completed the strategic stage of CIPFA’s professional qualification and not to have gained CIPFA Membership through a Mutual Recognition Agreement or other special pathway.
In seeking to secure membership of Body D Mr Huda produced to it what purported to be a genuine CIPFA Membership Certificate which indicated that he had become a “full” qualified CIPFA Member in August 2015, which was not the case. Mr Huda also produced what purported to be two genuine CIPFA letters of good standing to Body D. One, dated 11 August 2020, wrongly indicated that Mr Huda had obtained CIPFA Membership in August 2015 and that this was through CIPFA’s formal education route. The second, dated 28 August 2020, wrongly stated that he had completed CIPFA’s Professional Accountancy Qualification in June 2015. These letters of good standing also variously used incorrect membership details for Mr Huda and used a font and wording not appearing in CIPFA’s genuine letters of good standing.
When Body D contacted CIPFA about apparent discrepancies in the documents produced to it by Mr Huda, CIPFA checked it records and noted that the documents produced appeared to be falsified versions of genuine CIPFA documents produced to Mr Huda.
Body D took regulatory action against Mr Huda for obtaining admission to Body D by improper means, by making a false declaration to obtain membership. It also took action against him for producing a Body D letter not produced by that Body to obtain membership of Accountancy Body E. It’s Disciplinary Tribunal found these allegations proven and removed him from Body D membership.
In his communications with CIPFA Mr Huda accepted that falsified CIPFA documents had been provided to Body D but claimed that they had not been sent by him but by a third party who had produced the false documents as they were out to “destroy” him. He produced a screen shot from Facebook which he claimed supported his assertion, although it was dated 2017 and made no reference to the relevant documents or the context.
The Committee found that the CIPFA documents produced to Body D were false and that Mr Huda had produced them knowing this to be the case. Mr Huda’s account of events was implausible. It was not plausible that someone else would have gone to the necessary lengths of falsifying documents using Mr Huda’s correct details and had access to Mr Huda’s genuine CIPFA documents when the only beneficiary would have been Mr Huda. The Committee also found it proven that Mr Huda had acted as alleged in Body D’s regulatory case based on the formal outcome of its Tribunal proceedings.
The Committee found Mr Huda’s actions to be neither straightforward nor truthful. He had acted dishonestly. His actions were contrary to the Standards of Professional Practice on Ethics. They lacked integrity and did not accord with the principles of Professional Behaviour.
The Disciplinary Committee’s findings on breach of the Institute’s Bye-Laws
The Committee found that Mr Huda’s actions amounted to misconduct. His conduct would be considered deplorable by fellow members of the profession and the public. His actions were serious and brought discredit on himself, the Institute and the profession of accountancy (Bye-Law 23(d)).
Mr Huda’s conduct also breached the Institute’s Code of Ethics’ fundamental principles of integrity and professional behaviour and affected prejudicially the status, reputation or welfare of CIPFA (Bye-Law 23(b) and (c)).
Sanction and relevant considerations
The Disciplinary Committee directed that Mr Huda be expelled from the Institute.
The Committee found that obtaining or attempting to obtain membership of another professional body by forging CIPFA documents was fundamentally incompatible with continued membership of CIPFA. It was far too serious a matter for any lesser sanction to be administered.
In reaching its decision, the Committee noted that there were no mitigating factors.
The Committee also took into account relevant aggravating factors; Mr Huda’s actions were premeditated, involving a level of planning and sophistication, and undermined the integrity of the mutual agreement between CIPFA and Body D. Mr Huda had attempted to shift blame onto others and was motivated by personal gain. He had failed to engage meaningfully beyond initial denials and had shown a complete lack of insight and remorse. His actions had the potential to cause reputational harm to the profession.
The Committee also imposed a costs order against Mr Huda.
Ends
If you have any queries please visit the CIPFA press office.
CIPFA, is a global professional body, operating at local, national and international level. As a global leader in public finance management and governance, our aim is to make a difference to the world we live in.
Our work enables people to prosper, protects the vulnerable and helps sustain the environment for future generations. We’re committed to changing lives for the better.
By setting standards, leading on policy debate and advising public bodies and governments we help ensure the money and resources used on behalf of citizens are raised and spent fairly, transparently and efficiently and free from fraud and corruption.
Our goal is to always make it count.