O tópico servirá para ir partilhando notícias sobre situações de conflito claro de interesses, "revolving doors", corrupção comprovada em tribunal, investigações, etc.
--- /// ---
A crise de 2007 por si só terá inúmeros casos para serem explorados. Deixo aqui uma das situações:
Eric Holder, iniciou o seu cargo de chefe da divisão criminal do Dep. de Justiça em Fevereiro de 2009.
Antes dessa data (com início em 2001), trabalhou numa firma de advocacia chamada
Covington & Burling.
A pessoa em causa tem importância por estas razões:
(bolds e sublinhados da minha autoria)
Reuters reported in December that under Holder and Breuer, the Justice Department hasn't brought any criminal cases against big banks or other companies involved in mortgage servicing, even though copious evidence has surfaced of apparent criminal violations in foreclosure cases.
The evidence, including records from federal and state courts and local clerks' offices around the country, shows widespread forgery, perjury, obstruction of justice, and illegal foreclosures on the homes of thousands of active-duty military personnel.
In recent weeks the Justice Department has come under renewed pressure from members of Congress, state and local officials and homeowners' lawyers to open a wide-ranging criminal investigation of mortgage servicers, the biggest of which have been Covington clients. So far Justice officials haven't responded publicly to any of the requests.
While Holder and Breuer were partners at Covington, the firm's clients included the four largest U.S. banks - Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo & Co - as well as at least one other bank that is among the 10 largest mortgage servicers.
Servicers perform routine mortgage maintenance tasks, including filing foreclosures, on behalf of mortgage owners, usually groups of investors who bought mortgage-backed securities.
Covington represented Freddie Mac, one of the nation's biggest issuers of mortgage backed securities, in enforcement investigations by federal financial regulators.
A particular concern by those pressing for an investigation is Covington's involvement with Virginia-based MERS Corp, which runs a vast computerized registry of mortgages. Little known before the mortgage crisis hit, MERS, which stands for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems,
has been at the center of complaints about false or erroneous mortgage documents.Court records show that Covington, in the late 1990s, provided legal opinion letters needed to create MERS on behalf of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and several other large banks. It was meant to speed up registration and transfers of mortgages. By 2010, MERS claimed to own about half of all mortgages in the U.S. -- roughly 60 million loans.
...
Several lawyers for homeowners have said that even if Holder and Breuer haven't violated any ethics rules,
their ties to Covington create an impression of bias toward the firms' clients, especially in the absence of any prosecutions by the Justice Department.
fonteJust months after stepping down from the Justice Department, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is rejoining Covington & Burling, a Washington, D.C.-based white shoe law firm, where he worked from 2001 to 2009 before joining the Barack Obama administration.
At least five other lawyers, who worked at the Justice Department under Holder, including former enforcement chief Lanny Breuer, have also landed at the firm.Holder’s return to Covington is emblematic of the revolving door between government and the reins of corporate power that undermines public trust and erodes the integrity of the financial industry. His tenure as the nation’s top prosecutor was marked by withering criticism of failure to prosecute the banks represented by Covington, including Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup. Despite the catastrophic affect of the 2008 financial crisis, not a single bank executive has been prosecuted. Holder instead relied on deferred and non-prosecution agreements, and
extrajudicial settlements — back room deals that escaped judicial review. Many did not require an admission of guilt. He also allowed banks to classify fines, which represented a fraction of their earnings, as “remedial payments,”
making them tax deductiblefonte ***
O mais estranho é o Sr. Holder, ter sido nomeado para um cargo tão fundamental, após ter participado como advogado de defesa no caso em que a companhia de frutas Chiquita, financiou um grupo classificado como terrorista na Colômbia.
The issue of direct payments to the justice department by offending US corporations is a worrying trend. It is one that has risen sharply under the Bush administration and was first championed by former attorney general John Ashcroft.
In lieu of a trial, companies are allowed to pay a fine directly to the justice department. These agreements are readily accepted by companies, as they are cost effective,
avoid the stigma of public trial and don't set precedents.
None of the money paid goes to affected individuals or communities, which leaves any sense of justice wanting. There is also valid concern that
abuse of this system may lead to companies being less scrupulous.
Representing
Chiquita, Holder brokered a deal for the banana giant to pay $25m over five years to the justice department.
This arrangement was made after Chiquita admitted in 2003 to providing $1.7m over six years to the paramilitary group The United Self Defense Forces of Colombia. This group was listed as a terrorist organisation by the state department. Chiquita also allegedly provided a cache of surplus Nicaraguan army AK-47s through their own transport network. The payments continued unabated for months after Chiquita's admission.
The company claimed the payments were made to protect its workers, but it is unclear who was protected. Colombia's attorney general, Mario Iguaran, roundly rejects Chiquita's excuses. Iguaran believes
the payments were made to secure the unimpeded production of bananas and to quell labour unrest. He claims that at least 4,000 people were killed by these paramilitaries. Hundreds of the victims were banana workers and labour organisers.
...
In the final presidential debate, Obama stated that he firmly opposed a free trade agreement with Colombia. He was concerned about the multitude of human rights violations repeatedly levied against unions and other workers there.
Holder's views fly in the face of such concerns....
Every client is entitled to representation. Holder's roll as council to Chiquita is not questionable. The question is more fundamental: Does Holder represent the change we need and the change we were promised? It is time that someone who chooses to represent and serve human beings over corporations holds the position of attorney general.
fonte
Mostrar Mensagens
