Ethics & Compliance: Our Give and Take with the Government

by NAVEX Global
Contact

Last year, the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) indicated that it would be looking for additional ways to support the work of Ethics and Compliance Officers. Their stance came in part as a result of the Johns case following which the SEC’s Associate Director of Enforcement Stephen L. Cohen stated that the Commission’s position on the case 'should send a clear message' that the SEC would 'not tolerate interference' with chief compliance officers endeavoring to do their jobs.

While encouraging, this latest position by the SEC is best viewed as part of a history of give and take between the Ethics and Compliance (E&C) community on the one hand, and government agencies on the other. At times, governments have taken steps to support our efforts, but just as often government action has undermined our work.

For example, initially the rules governing the SEC’s Whistleblower Program were hotly contested by several U.S. companies and organizations. They argued that whistleblowers should be required to first tell their companies about misconduct and give them a chance to correct problems before informing the SEC. Only after this push back did the Commission add new provisions that:

  • Preserve a whistleblower’s ‘place in line’ for an award if the whistleblower reports internally and the SEC is subsequently informed about the violations within 120 days. 
  • The SEC will consider a whistleblower’s use of their company’s internal reporting systems as a factor that can increase the amount of an award.
  • The SEC will credit whistleblowers whose companies pass their information to the Commission, even if the whistleblowers themselves do not.

While these changes were welcomed, the new rules did not fully meet the objections of critics since they do not require whistleblowers to try to report violations internally – or state why they couldn’t – in order to qualify for an award.

As another example of the give and take, for years the E&C community urged – without success – the Department of Justice to make information more readily available about its charging decisions, especially when it chose not to prosecute or to reduce charges based on the target organization having an effective program. These decisions often included findings that could be essential to convincing senior leadership of the value of the E&C function. Though some steps have been taken to improve access – for example, the announcement of the Ralph Lauren non-prosecution agreement for FCPA violations provided some of the needed context – the situation is still far from ideal.

Perhaps the best example of this give and take process was the launch of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations in 1991. It is well documented that the Guidelines were the primary catalyst for the growth of the current E&C era, including the overall design of most companies’ E&C programs. But unfortunately, the Guidelines also created the check-the-box approach that side tracked and marginalized business ethics for years. The revisions of the Guidelines in 2004 were, in part, an attempt to correct this mistake, but the damage was already done and the reframing of the E&C function is still underway a decade later.

In sum, while we welcome the SEC’s latest pledge to support our work, it’s best to remember the broader context and the ongoing give and take that has shaped so much of what we do. With this in mind, going forward, the E&C community needs to stay informed on government actions and their impact, and remain an active player letting its position be known to policy makers and regulators.

- See more at: http://www.navexglobal.com/blog/2014/02/13/ethics-compliance-our-give-and-take-government#sthash.ijz4baSc.dpuf

Last year, the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) indicated that it would be looking for additional ways to support the work of Ethics and Compliance Officers. Their stance came in part as a result of the Johns case following which the SEC’s Associate Director of Enforcement Stephen L. Cohen stated that the Commission’s position on the case 'should send a clear message' that the SEC would 'not tolerate interference' with chief compliance officers endeavoring to do their jobs.

While encouraging, this latest position by the SEC is best viewed as part of a history of give and take between the Ethics and Compliance (E&C) community on the one hand, and government agencies on the other. At times, governments have taken steps to support our efforts, but just as often government action has undermined our work.

For example, initially the rules governing the SEC’s Whistleblower Program were hotly contested by several U.S. companies and organizations. They argued that whistleblowers should be required to first tell their companies about misconduct and give them a chance to correct problems before informing the SEC. Only after this push back did the Commission add new provisions that:

  • Preserve a whistleblower’s ‘place in line’ for an award if the whistleblower reports internally and the SEC is subsequently informed about the violations within 120 days. 
  • The SEC will consider a whistleblower’s use of their company’s internal reporting systems as a factor that can increase the amount of an award.
  • The SEC will credit whistleblowers whose companies pass their information to the Commission, even if the whistleblowers themselves do not.

While these changes were welcomed, the new rules did not fully meet the objections of critics since they do not require whistleblowers to try to report violations internally – or state why they couldn’t – in order to qualify for an award.

As another example of the give and take, for years the E&C community urged – without success – the Department of Justice to make information more readily available about its charging decisions, especially when it chose not to prosecute or to reduce charges based on the target organization having an effective program. These decisions often included findings that could be essential to convincing senior leadership of the value of the E&C function. Though some steps have been taken to improve access – for example, the announcement of the Ralph Lauren non-prosecution agreement for FCPA violations provided some of the needed context – the situation is still far from ideal.

Perhaps the best example of this give and take process was the launch of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines for Organizations in 1991. It is well documented that the Guidelines were the primary catalyst for the growth of the current E&C era, including the overall design of most companies’ E&C programs. But unfortunately, the Guidelines also created the check-the-box approach that side tracked and marginalized business ethics for years. The revisions of the Guidelines in 2004 were, in part, an attempt to correct this mistake, but the damage was already done and the reframing of the E&C function is still underway a decade later.

In sum, while we welcome the SEC’s latest pledge to support our work, it’s best to remember the broader context and the ongoing give and take that has shaped so much of what we do. With this in mind, going forward, the E&C community needs to stay informed on government actions and their impact, and remain an active player letting its position be known to policy makers and regulators.

 

Written by:

NAVEX Global
Contact
more
less

NAVEX Global on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.