The Keppel saga is getting more messy.
http://www.fcpablog.com/…/at-keppel-it-wasnt-a-rogue-employ…
My view:
I do not agree with the step taken by the current board and management of Keppel Corp.
It is cowardice for the current management to admit that the previous management were involved in giving bribes to the Brazil government officials.
It is true that the previous management did pay consulting fees to the intermediary to take care of the local arrangements. It is understood, and perhaps stated in writing, that the local arrangements had to be made without breaking any law.
If bribes were given, it is the intermediary who had commited the crime and broken the law.
The intermediary might have testified, under pressure, that he was authorised by the Keppel management to give bribes. This should be a matter between the intermediary and the previous management of Keppel.
The current management of Keppel has no right to admit that the previous management had committed any wrong doing. It is for the previous management to testify if they did or did not authorize the giving of bribes. I am certain that they would deny this allegation.
I understand that the corporate lawyer of Keppel also expressed some regret for his involvement in preparing the legal documents. This is still not conclusive that the previous management was engaged in bribery.
I worry about the quality of our corporate and government leaders today.
http://www.fcpablog.com/…/at-keppel-it-wasnt-a-rogue-employ…
My view:
I do not agree with the step taken by the current board and management of Keppel Corp.
It is cowardice for the current management to admit that the previous management were involved in giving bribes to the Brazil government officials.
It is true that the previous management did pay consulting fees to the intermediary to take care of the local arrangements. It is understood, and perhaps stated in writing, that the local arrangements had to be made without breaking any law.
If bribes were given, it is the intermediary who had commited the crime and broken the law.
The intermediary might have testified, under pressure, that he was authorised by the Keppel management to give bribes. This should be a matter between the intermediary and the previous management of Keppel.
The current management of Keppel has no right to admit that the previous management had committed any wrong doing. It is for the previous management to testify if they did or did not authorize the giving of bribes. I am certain that they would deny this allegation.
I understand that the corporate lawyer of Keppel also expressed some regret for his involvement in preparing the legal documents. This is still not conclusive that the previous management was engaged in bribery.
I worry about the quality of our corporate and government leaders today.
Tan Kin Lian
No comments:
Post a Comment