ENJOYOR(SZ:300020) 中国基金报·2025-12-01 01:17Core Viewpoint - The article reveals a governance power struggle within ST Yinjing, highlighted by irregularities in board meeting notifications and voting processes, leading to allegations of misconduct by certain board members [1][4][14]. Group 1: Board Meeting Irregularities - On November 18, ST Yinjing announced that the board meeting had a voting result of "5 votes in favor, 0 votes against, 0 abstentions" for the new board candidates, despite two directors being absent [3]. - Two directors, Peng Xiaoyong and Cai Yang, claimed they were not absent by choice but were unable to attend due to a lack of communication from the acting chairman, resulting in a "passive absence" [4][14]. - The board had previously met on November 12 to discuss the same matters, but the decisions made during that meeting were not disclosed to the public [10][14]. Group 2: Communication Failures - Peng Xiaoyong reported that he attempted to contact the acting chairman multiple times on the day of the meeting but received no response, and the meeting link was only sent to him 28 hours after the meeting had already taken place [6][8]. - The failure to provide meeting details in advance and the unusual method of sending the meeting link raised concerns about the legitimacy of the meeting process [8][14]. Group 3: Legal Actions and Governance Concerns - Peng Xiaoyong has reported the situation to regulatory authorities and filed a lawsuit against the company, seeking to annul the decisions made under questionable procedural circumstances [14]. - Legal experts indicated that the company is required to disclose board meeting results promptly, and failure to do so, especially when there are dissenting votes, violates information disclosure regulations [16].