To begin this topic, the case of China Sky describes the appointment of a special auditor in the organization that is also a rule in the procedures of Singapore Exchange (SGX). There is some argument that presents the arguments in the favour of audit firm partners to join the audit committees along with the some arguments against it. The firms should allow audit firm partners and/or employees to join audit committees because it would help to investigate the mutual transactions between the audit committee chairman and the company that is the first argument. The other argument is that the committee would find out the reason behind the failure of land acquisitions in the country of the china (MediaCorp Pte Ltd, 2013). Both arguments are effective for the management of China Sky because the appointment of the auditor would help the company to follow the instructions of the stock exchange that also help the company to hold the interest of the market and stakeholders for managing the profitability concepts.
On the other hand, by the appointments of the auditors, the management of the company could also retain the transparency factors at the time of financial transactions that is very necessary for the listed organization because any hidden processes would affect the confidence of investors in the growth figure of the company that could reduce the per share value of the organization and would influence the reputation in market negatively (MediaCorp Pte Ltd, 2013). The argument against the appointment of auditors is that there was no justification for the directive that would be used by the auditors at the time of financial audit. Without the proper justification, the working of auditors could increase the conflicts between the auditing committees that would make the failure of auditors' appointments with the organizations.