the art of not judging, or the lack of courage to do so until the end. On Friday, the Court of appeal of Versailles, in charge of redoing the match between Jerome Kerviel and the Société générale, has ordered the trader to pay 1 million euros in damages to her ex-employer. Very far from the 5 billion obtained in a first time by the bank, prior to cancellation by the Court of cassation due to the “failure of its internal controls.”
The Society in general, camping is the posture of a victim, is she a little, a lot or not at all complicit in the actions of Kerviel ? The latter being sentenced to three years in prison, it is now the only issue of justice. At the hearing, the prosecution had requested the release of any repairs from the bank, on the grounds that it would “made mistakes, sufficient to counteract the total loss of its right to claim damages and interest”. This is consistent with previous decisions : on the disciplinary level, the banking Commission imposing in 2008 at Société générale, a fine of 4 million euros due to the indigence of its internal controls ; * on the prud homal, the bank was ordered in June to pay 455 000 euro to Jerome Kerviel for unfair dismissal, on the grounds that it was “to the current long-date” of exceedances of threshold of investment.
This is the whole case, Kerviel, or the case of Société générale, according to the points of view : the bank has allowed it to do as long as its trader paid him back the money, before you turn the thumb once its investments become losers. the “It has not sanctioned its acts, but its consequences”, pointed to the judges labor processes. the “The fraud of Jérôme Kerviel reveals the fault of the bank”, a summary of the prosecutor of Versailles. Best or worst : “The fault has allowed the fraud.”
Why not zero or a billion ?
The Court has not dared to go until the end of the reasoning, stating that “Jérôme Kerviel is partly responsible for the harm caused to Society in general”. But this part is strangely calibrated : € 1 million represents 0.02% of the damage final. The bank attorney, Jean Veil, has thought good to salute a decision “quite satisfactory”, so that his client is judged to be co-responsible to 99.98 %… Has the bar, the Société générale had been admitted to its “negligence”, suggesting, however, a breakdown of the damage “in a favourable ratio” to the bank.
The sharing of responsibilities is apparent from the moistened finger. The Court notes, the “luxury of processes fraud” Kerviel to conceal his speculations. But points back to the “choice management” of his employer, “promoting risk-taking for the benefit of the cost-effectiveness”. And if she insists often on the aspect of “erratic” or “incomplete” of the internal controls, there is nothing to determine how it has placed the cursor to 1 million. Why not zero or a billion ? Justice is definitely not an exact science.
The controversy over the tax bonus of the Company in general will bounce back again. For the record, in 2008, Eric Woerth, then Budget minister, was an agreement for a tax credit of 2.2 billion euros (a third of a loss is fully attributed to Kerviel, therefore, independent of his will). François Hollande, who is not yet president of the Republic, was indignant : “How can we accept that when a bank makes a mistake, it is the taxpayer who pays for that ?” once elected, the alleged “enemy of finance” cannot be divested not of a impavidité bovine.
“We can not blame the wolf to enter the sheepfold though the door is open”
Julien Bayou, spokesman of the Greens, objected to in a book published Thursday (éditions Arcanes, 17), Kerviel, an affair of State, the two billion to the Société générale. It pulls in the heap : “The bank knowingly attempted to defraud the taxpayer in collusion with the guilty at the highest political level, for the hold-up frieze of the perfect crime.” The agitator, a holder of a law degree, points to the mixture of private and public interests : Frédéric Oudéa, president of the Society in general, was the adviser of Nicolas Sarkozy during his first spell at Bercy (under the government of Balladur) ; Thierry Aulagnon, appointed this summer as director of cabinet of Michel Sapin, had pantouflé for fifteen years in the same bank. the “We can not blame the wolf to enter the sheepfold though the door is open”, reports to Bayou, to which “the case of Kerviel, now case Corporation, is now a matter of State.”
Regularly, Michel Sapin is questioned by parliamentarians on this same topic : when the heck are you going to require that the Company’s general renders these damn $ 2 billion ? The pressure amount at the approach of the judgment of the Court of Versailles, Christian Eckert, secretary of State for the Budget, was handed over to the future authority of res judicata : “If justice were to conclude that the cancellation of the damages, we are of course consequences.” A member of parliament green, Isabelle Attard, had previously argued : “The logic is that you get back your money now, even to allow a deduction before final judgment.” justice is on the past (notwithstanding a possible appeal to the supreme court of the Société générale), remains only to bend down to pick up $ 2.2 billion. Has to 0.02 %.
No comments:
Post a Comment