By way of background, the four-member board of directors published a media statement on 31 March titled ‘Clarification regarding JAA Suppliers Sub Committee.’
It reads:
“The JAA also wishes to clarify that the suggestion the Association has recorded losses over the past decade. The Association has been financially stable overall, with the limited instances of two reported losses attributable to clearly identifiable and explainable factors.” [Emphasis added]
This statement was published in response to a letter to industry suppliers distributed by Expertise Events managing director Gary Fitz-Roy on 12 March.
As previously documented, the JAA’s statement included demonstrably false claims.
Explained in simple terms, the JAA claimed that it had recorded financial losses in two accounting years over the past decade, when it had in fact reported losses on four occasions.
The board statement was published the day after its annual general meeting (AGM), which took place on 30 March.
In the lead-up to the AGM, two directors had submitted resignations - Stephen Schneider and Mary Storch – which brought to three the number of directors departing the board.
As previously reported, Jay Bartlett abruptly quit the JAA in early February, citing governance and cultural issues as core concerns.
On 7 April, the JAA published a news release, titled ‘Board update following the AGM’, which outlined various outcomes from the AGM, including the appointment of Anna Hakman as a new co-opted director.
"Anna brings a depth of governance and strategic experience that will significantly strengthen the Board,” JAA president Joshua Sharp explained.
“Her ability to navigate complex environments and provide clear, risk-aware guidance aligns strongly with the JAA’s priorities as we continue to evolve and deliver value for members and industry.”
Will you investigate?
The JAA’s article failed to mention the specific date of Hakman’s appointment; however, Jeweller has confirmed it was 1 April.
This was two days after the AGM, and one day after the board published the false claims about its financial affairs.
Logically, this means that Hakman’s appointment to the board post-dates the JAA’s decision to publish the aforementioned false claims.
As the newly appointed governance expert, Jeweller contacted Hakman, asking her to review how it came about that the JAA authorised the publication of an inaccurate claim.
Specifically, she was asked to review how this happened and whether, as a co-opted director, she considered it appropriate for the JAA to issue a retraction and/or correction.
Background reading: JAA directors' undisclosed relationship
These questions raised with Hakman were deemed appropriate given her governance expertise and, perhaps more importantly, because it would be inappropriate for the JAA’s other directors and staff to investigate their own conduct.
Hakman was contacted on 13 April and was provided a deadline of 17 April to respond and/or provide a comment. The JAA board acknowledged the email on 16 April, specifically stating that, “Your enquiry has been noted.”
With that said, at the time of publication (20 April), Hakman has not responded to the questions provided.
Who is Anna Hakman?
It’s worth noting that the JAA’s website - along with the member news confirming her appointment - provides scant detail about Hakman’s background or her professional and employment history.
A LinkedIn profile indicates that Hakman joined Monash University in February in the full-time position of ‘Strategic Initiatives and Governance’.
This profile also details her appointment to the JAA as a ‘non-executive director’ in April, and her membership of the Australian Institute of Company Directors.
It reads:
“[Hakman] brings deep expertise in governance, risk management and institutional oversight, developed through senior leadership roles with board-level exposure. Proven in establishing governance frameworks and decision-making structures that enable institutional confidence.”
Following the lack of response to Jeweller’s questions regarding the appropriate review and response to the board’s decision to publish false claims, Hakman has subsequently been asked if she supports the core values published on the JAA website.
These include:
- “We are committed to ethics by way of demonstrating professionalism, transparency and fairness in our dealings and conduct”
- “We work to build trust, truthfulness and credibility through consistent actions and words.”
[Bold emphasis is original JAA text]
The JAA is registered with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC), and Governance Standard 5 stipulates that responsible people [directors] are subject to, understand, and carry out the duties, which include:
- to act with reasonable care and diligence
- to act honestly and fairly in the best interests of the charity and for its charitable purposes
- to ensure that the financial affairs of the charity are managed responsibly
At the time of publication, the JAA board had not explained the misleading claims about its financial affairs, nor has it corrected or retracted them. Additionally, Hackman has been provided another opportunity to provide her governance expertise and guidance on the error.
More reading
JAA’s suppliers failure leads to false claims and more controversy
JAA Board: Two more resignations; second co-opted director appointed
Train wreck: JAA’s Supplier Sub Committee does more harm than good
JAA in the bad books after failing to explain financial shortfall
Crushing blow: JAA director confirms shock resignation
JAA’s Correction Request: Rules for thee, but not me