- Chief Compliance Officer and VP of Legal Affairs, Arrow Electronics
By 
Aly McDevitt2020-09-17T13:00:00
On April 24, when Carnival had its quarterly status conference regarding progress made on the environmental compliance plan (ECP), everybody was in shock, according to Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer Peter Anderson. The cruise industry had been on pause for a month, and now all other nonessential businesses were suspending operations, too. Restaurants and bars were closed. Universities sent students home, away from their campuses. Children were home; parents were home. By then, the death toll in the United States from the coronavirus had passed 50,000, accounting for about a quarter of worldwide deaths, according to John Hopkins data. The year’s turn of events had given everyone whiplash.
The court hearing was held virtually, and the court was accommodating and compassionate, said Anderson. There weren’t a lot of sparks or drama, but U.S. District Judge Patricia Seitz did ask a pointed question:
What was the company, E&C in particular, planning to do during the pause to come back stronger when ships returned to service?
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.
