- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Aly McDevitt2020-09-14T13:00:00
While managing the coronavirus outbreak on Diamond Princess in Asia, Carnival received more bad news: The virus had infected Grand Princess off the West Coast of the United States.
Grand Princess set sail on a round-trip itinerary to Mexico on Feb. 11 and to Hawaii on Feb. 21, with many of the same crew and 68 of the same passengers aboard both voyages. On March 4, California health officials reported the COVID-19-related death of a passenger from the former voyage. Princess confirmed an outbreak aboard the subsequent trip 48 hours later. The ship remained about 50 miles off the coast of San Francisco for three days, and disembarkation began in the port of Oakland on March 9.
In the span of two weeks from Compliance Week’s visit to Carnival headquarters, the number of COVID-19 cases outside of China had increased 13-fold. The number of infected countries had tripled.
On March 11, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a pandemic.
The cruise industry changed quickly after that.
THIS IS MEMBERS-ONLY CONTENT. To continue reading, choose one of the options below.
News and analysis for the well-informed compliance or audit exec. Select an option and click continue.
Annual Membership $499 Value offer
Full price one year membership with auto-renewal.
Membership $599
One-year only, no auto-renewal.
Data governance has become a key concern for companies, especially when the EU AI Act and General Data Protection Regulation have put a premium on handling data responsibly and ensuring that artificial intelligence does not cause harm.
New York-based investment firm Drexel Hamilton will pay more than $1.1 million in penalties, with four current and former employees paying fines as well over committing hundreds of violations of rules regarding the sale of municipal bonds.
Companies spend huge sums on audit, risk management, and compliance to alert them about potential legal issues before they escalate into serious corporate governance failings. There’s only one problem, however–they often misread their own early warning signs or ignore them altogether.
Both JPMorgan Chase and Deutsche Bank retained their respective Jeffrey Epstein relationships for too long. Yet, there is a case to be made for why exiting a high-risk relationship too soon can become an inverse form of recklessness.
Why did JPMorgan Chase retain Jeffrey Epstein for more than a dozen years? How did the relationship persist despite glaring red flags? The “why” is straightforward; the “how” is more complicated.
Jeffrey Epstein’s designation as a high-risk client should have subjected him to enhanced due diligence that never appeared to occur, most notably at Deutsche Bank. Instead, Epstein was allowed to continue his misconduct despite numerous red flags.
