The Madoff scandal is one of the low points in the
history of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Every Congressional hearing
or SEC-basher inevitably uses the failure to catch Madoff as evidence of the
ineffectiveness of the SEC.
In a continuing journey down the rabbit hole, the SEC's
Inspector General David Kotz released his 123-page report (.pdf) on
former SEC General Counsel David Becker and his involvement with Madoff. Kotz
has made a referral to the Department of Justice under a criminal conflict of
Mr. Becker's late mother had an account with Madoff. If
Mr. Becker were to be involved in mopping up the Madoff matter, there would be
potential conflict of interest.
David Becker seems to have done the correct thing. He
sought an answer from the SEC Ethics Counsel as to whether he should work on
"I did precisely what I was supposed to do. I identified
a matter that required legal advice from the SEC's Ethics Office. I sought that
advice, received it, and followed it." Testimony
of David Becker September 22, 2011
He fully disclosed the fact that he had been a
beneficiary of his mother's estate which had invested in Madoff funds. The
Ethics Counsel told him he did not need to recuse himself. His boss, SEC Chair
Mary Shapiro, knew of the investment.
Nonetheless, the SEC's Inspector General is referring its
results to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation.
Personally, I don't think Mr. Becker actually did
anything wrong. I believe he joined the SEC as a white hat, wanting to resume
his role in public service.
The problem is that it looks like he did something wrong.
That's the problem with conflicts of interest. Even if you do the right thing,
it will look like you were improperly influenced or tainted.
Becker did seek guidance from the SEC's Ethics Counsel.
Unfortunately, the Ethics Counsel is part of the Office of the General Counsel.
As General Counsel, Becker was the advice-giver's boss. Another conflict.
I'm not saying that Becker actually unduly influenced the Ethics Counsel. It's
just looks bad and layers another conflict of interest onto the existing
conflict of interest.
The SEC knew that Madoff was toxic and high-profile. They
should have been more vigilant and not allowed Becker to participate. I would
guess that Becker was so good at his job and so enthusiastic to help that he
and the SEC failed to see his weaknesses. It would be hard to make him sit on
the sidelines while the Commission was trying to clean-up after one of its
biggest failure. But that is what they should have done.
They let the conflict of interest stay in place. That
should have known that it would subject them to a later review and attack on
their decision to keep Becker involved. They should have known that it would
have led to something like the Inspector General's report.
I don't think Becker should be subject to criminal
charges and hopefully the Department of Justice will drop the matter after a
additional commentary on developments in compliance and ethics, visit Compliance Building,
a blog hosted by Doug Cornelius.
For more information about LexisNexis
products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.