Showing posts with label Board. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Board. Show all posts

Friday, May 17, 2013

Shareholders should not be prosecuted for the sins of the board and employees

Many people were getting in their licks yesterday as the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs gave three top government officials a tongue lashing about the way they are not handling the failure of major financial institutions to comply with two complex regulations governing money laundering and sanctions.

The failure of the board of directors to oversee policies and procedures at HSBC allowed a small but important number of bank employees to knowingly allow transactions they knew at the time were in violation of the law or took no action to control the inefficient management when the violations were first discovered. No doubt, laws were violated and indictments for felonious behavior were called for.

However, let us not throw the baby out with the bath water. There is nothing to be gained by prosecuting a corporation in the banking business for criminal activities when only a few miscreants are to blame. But why, we have asked for months, have the regulatory agencies failed to file criminal indictments against both the lower level managers responsible for the lapsed oversight and the members of the Board of Directors who appear to have been asleep at the switch?

Let’s remember that the former dean of the Stanford School of Business who was a member of the board of Enron was indicted, found guilty and fined down to his basic holdings for not being on top of both the Enron management and a few not so honorable members of the auditing firm, Arthur Andersen. Unfortunately, the shareholders of Enron and the partners and employees of Arthur Andersen were left holding the bag or out of work.

With Sarbanes-Oxley and the more recent Dodd-Frank legislation, the federal government is taking over functions that for two hundred years have been the provenance of the state governments, and without appropriate legislation, they still do not have the legal right to indict a corporation for anything other than tax evasion or violation of the Clean Air Act and other operating functions.

Criminal indictments should have been made by the Securities and Exchange Commission, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and Federal Reserve Bank by sending their evidence to the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice in the cases of Goldman Sachs, Barclays, AIG, and numerous other financial institutions and asking for formal criminal indictment procedures to follow through.

They did not. SEC claimed that they have preferred really big fines and a slap on the wrist because they have testified the Securities Exchange Acts of 1933 and 1934 are too vague on errors of omission to justify the effort to support a criminal indictment. It must be said that Mary Schapiro, the former head of the SEC had on more than one occasion asked the Congress to clarify and strengthen the legal basis for enforcement and prosecution.

If we are going to obtain discipline in any organization for conduct in accordance with stated principles, policies and procedures, laid down by the Board of Directors, there must be a fear factor. That is achieved by making it clear to all employees from the Board on down that violations of internal governance procedures will result in termination with cause. Violation of external governance regulations will be sent to regulatory agencies with recommendations for both civil and criminal indictments.

There is little doubt that banks have cut back funding and lost board control of the training programs for these critically important functions. They and the perpetrators of violations should be painfully aware of the possible civil and criminal penalties.

Filing federal charges against a corporation registered and governed by a state will open a can of legal worms. It is totally unnecessary. Board members need to take a greater interest in assuring that compliance and internal audit procedures are being implemented effectively. Do not stand by those few employees who, with malice aforethought, violate a law either for recognition of a successful profit making unit or other motivations of avarice and greed.

In any case, send those truly guilty to jail. 

James is executive director of the Center for Global Governance, Reporting and Regulation at Pace University’s Lubin School of Business in New York City. James is also program director of Pace University’s Certified Compliance and Regulatory Professional certificate program.

View Comments

View the original article here

Saturday, May 11, 2013

UPDATE 1-India board rules against Bayer in cancer drug patent case

* Bayer's appeal against licence for generic Nexavar dismissed

* Royalty payment to Bayer raised to 7 pct on Nexavar sales * Natco Pharma fined for presenting incorrect data

(Adds details, background, quotes)

By Anupama Chandrasekaran

CHENNAI, March 4 (Reuters) - An Indian patent appeals board upheld on Monday a decision to allow a domestic company to sell a generic version of Bayer AG's cancer drug Nexavar, in a blow for global drugmakers' efforts to hold on to monopolies on high-price medicines.

The ruling paves the way for the issue of more so-called compulsory licences as governments, particularly in emerging markets such as China and Thailand, battle to bring down healthcare costs and provide access to affordable drugs to treat diseases such as cancer, HIV-AIDS and hepatitis.

Bayer, Germany's largest drugmaker, said it would continue to fight to overturn the decision, which it said weakened the international patent system and endangered pharmaceutical research.

Under a global Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement, countries can issue compulsory licences on certain drugs that are deemed unaffordable to a large section of their populations.

India's $13 billion drug market is seen by drugmakers as a huge opportunity, but there are concerns about the level of protection for intellectual property in the country -- where generic medicines account for more than 90 percent of drug sales -- after a series of judicial setbacks for "big pharma".

COMPULSORY LICENCE CHALLENGED

Last year, the Indian patents office allowed Natco Pharma

to sell generic Nexavar at 8,800 rupees ($160) for a month's dose -- a fraction of Bayer's price of 280,000 rupees.

Bayer challenged this decision to grant Natco a compulsory licence at the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) in the southern city of Chennai.

On Monday the board dismissed the petition, although it did order Natco Pharma to pay a royalty of 7 percent on sales of generic Nexavar to Bayer, an increase from the 6 percent royalty that had earlier been set.

Also, the board fined Natco Pharma 50,000 rupees for presenting incorrect facts during the legal proceedings. The amount would be donated to a cancer treatment hospital, the board ordered.

Announcing the decision, Justice Prabha Sridevan said the kidney and liver cancer drug should be available at an affordable price to everybody.

Bayer said in a statement it "strongly disagreed" with the conclusions of the board, adding that it would seek to challenge it at the High Court in Mumbai.

"The challenges faced by the Indian healthcare system have little or nothing to do with patents on pharmaceutical products as all products on India's essential drug list are not patented," the company said.

Natco Pharma Company Secretary M. Adinarayana told reporters the board had delivered a "reasoned, detailed" decision that could be "sustained in any court of law".

LEGAL SETBACKS

In a separate case, Bayer has accused another Indian drugmaker, Cipla , of infringing its patent on Nexavar. Cipla had launched its generic version of Nexavar before Natco won the compulsory licence.

Cipla undercut Natco's price in May last year and now sells the drug at 6,840 rupees for a month's dose.

Among other setbacks for Western drug companies, India has revoked patents granted to Pfizer Inc's cancer drug Sutent, Roche Holding AG's hepatitis C drug Pegasys and Merck & Co's asthma treatment aerosol suspension formulation.

Another case involving drug patents is currently in front of the Supreme Court, with Novartis battling against an earlier decision refusing it a patent on cancer drug Glivec.

New Delhi has also taken other measures, such as controlling the prices of generic medicines and providing free medicines at government-run hospitals that cater to the country's poor.

Last week a government panel recommended a formula to curb prices of patented drugs to make them affordable for the world's second-most populous country.

($1 = 54.90 rupees)

(Additional reporting and writing by Kaustubh Kulkarni in MUMBAI; Editing by Alex Richardson)

((kaustubh.kulkarni@thomsonreuters.com)(+91 22 61807399)(Reuters Messaging: kaustubh.kulkarni.thomsonreuters.com@reuters.net))

Keywords: INDIA BAYER/


View the original article here

Friday, May 10, 2013

UPDATE 1-India board rules against Bayer in cancer drug patent case

* Bayer's appeal against licence for generic Nexavar dismissed

* Royalty payment to Bayer raised to 7 pct on Nexavar sales * Natco Pharma fined for presenting incorrect data

(Adds details, background, quotes)

By Anupama Chandrasekaran

CHENNAI, March 4 (Reuters) - An Indian patent appeals board upheld on Monday a decision to allow a domestic company to sell a generic version of Bayer AG's cancer drug Nexavar, in a blow for global drugmakers' efforts to hold on to monopolies on high-price medicines.

The ruling paves the way for the issue of more so-called compulsory licences as governments, particularly in emerging markets such as China and Thailand, battle to bring down healthcare costs and provide access to affordable drugs to treat diseases such as cancer, HIV-AIDS and hepatitis.

Bayer, Germany's largest drugmaker, said it would continue to fight to overturn the decision, which it said weakened the international patent system and endangered pharmaceutical research.

Under a global Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement, countries can issue compulsory licences on certain drugs that are deemed unaffordable to a large section of their populations.

India's $13 billion drug market is seen by drugmakers as a huge opportunity, but there are concerns about the level of protection for intellectual property in the country -- where generic medicines account for more than 90 percent of drug sales -- after a series of judicial setbacks for "big pharma".

COMPULSORY LICENCE CHALLENGED

Last year, the Indian patents office allowed Natco Pharma

to sell generic Nexavar at 8,800 rupees ($160) for a month's dose -- a fraction of Bayer's price of 280,000 rupees.

Bayer challenged this decision to grant Natco a compulsory licence at the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) in the southern city of Chennai.

On Monday the board dismissed the petition, although it did order Natco Pharma to pay a royalty of 7 percent on sales of generic Nexavar to Bayer, an increase from the 6 percent royalty that had earlier been set.

Also, the board fined Natco Pharma 50,000 rupees for presenting incorrect facts during the legal proceedings. The amount would be donated to a cancer treatment hospital, the board ordered.

Announcing the decision, Justice Prabha Sridevan said the kidney and liver cancer drug should be available at an affordable price to everybody.

Bayer said in a statement it "strongly disagreed" with the conclusions of the board, adding that it would seek to challenge it at the High Court in Mumbai.

"The challenges faced by the Indian healthcare system have little or nothing to do with patents on pharmaceutical products as all products on India's essential drug list are not patented," the company said.

Natco Pharma Company Secretary M. Adinarayana told reporters the board had delivered a "reasoned, detailed" decision that could be "sustained in any court of law".

LEGAL SETBACKS

In a separate case, Bayer has accused another Indian drugmaker, Cipla , of infringing its patent on Nexavar. Cipla had launched its generic version of Nexavar before Natco won the compulsory licence.

Cipla undercut Natco's price in May last year and now sells the drug at 6,840 rupees for a month's dose.

Among other setbacks for Western drug companies, India has revoked patents granted to Pfizer Inc's cancer drug Sutent, Roche Holding AG's hepatitis C drug Pegasys and Merck & Co's asthma treatment aerosol suspension formulation.

Another case involving drug patents is currently in front of the Supreme Court, with Novartis battling against an earlier decision refusing it a patent on cancer drug Glivec.

New Delhi has also taken other measures, such as controlling the prices of generic medicines and providing free medicines at government-run hospitals that cater to the country's poor.

Last week a government panel recommended a formula to curb prices of patented drugs to make them affordable for the world's second-most populous country.

($1 = 54.90 rupees)

(Additional reporting and writing by Kaustubh Kulkarni in MUMBAI; Editing by Alex Richardson)

((kaustubh.kulkarni@thomsonreuters.com)(+91 22 61807399)(Reuters Messaging: kaustubh.kulkarni.thomsonreuters.com@reuters.net))

Keywords: INDIA BAYER/


View the original article here

Sunday, February 17, 2013

Doctors Praise Bill To Repeal Medicare Cost-Cutting Board

The American Medical Association praised the reintroduction Wednesday of a bill to repeal the controversial Medicare payments board in President Obama's healthcare law.

Rep. Phil Roe (R-Tenn.) reintroduced his bill to repeal the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) — a panel of 15 healthcare experts with the power to cut Medicare payments to doctors if spending grows faster than a prescribed rate.

The AMA and other healthcare providers strongly oppose the IPAB, which would essentially have the power to make Medicare cuts now reserved for Congress — and thus subject to intense lobbying by groups trying to avoid a cut to their payments.

"IPAB is a panel that would have too little accountability and the power to make indiscriminate cuts that adversely affect access to healthcare for patients," AMA President Jeremy Lazarus said in a statement.

Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-Pa.) is again cosponsoring Roe's bill, as she did in the last Congress.

Republicans — including Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) — have called for IPAB repeal to be on the table in debt and deficit negotiations, but because the IPAB reduces costs, repealing it would add to the deficit.

View Comments

View the original article here

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Ohio School Board Votes To Arm School Janitors

The Montpelier Exempted Village Schools Board of Education in Montelier, Ohio voted unanimously on Wednesday night to allow handgun training for four custodians, who will then tote firearms on the school’s campus. In an explanation of this policy that echoes the National Rifle Association’s infamous claim that “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun,” school Superintendent Jamie Grime claimed that “having guns in the hands of the right people are not a hindrance. They are a means to protect.”

This is not the first time janitors were suggested as the first line of defense against a school shooter, in an article arguing that the Sandy Hook shooting resulted in more deaths because “[t]here was not a single adult male on the school premises when the shooting occurred,” the National Review’s Charlotte Allen lamented that “[t]here didn’t even seem to be a male janitor to heave his bucket at Adam Lanza’s knees.”

[HT: Stephen Webster]


View the original article here