The events of the last couple of weeks related to Barclays and its involvement in the alleged conspiracy and manipulation of the Libor have raised several questions”among them, What internal data analytics systems do financial institutions have in place to screen for potential wrongdoing?
As part of the settlement agreement between Barclays and regulatory agencies, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has required the implementation of screening methodologies to flag patterns which may be indicative of a conspiracy or manipulation of the Libor.
A year ago I wrote about this topic, stressing the urgency of such enhanced compliance programs and illustrating their need with the ongoing concerns on the Libor. This article, Â Libor Litigation and the Role of Screening: The Need for Enhanced Compliance Programs, was published on July 2011, and is available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1943220.
In February of this year I wrote another article explaining why screening methodologies need to be a part of any compliance program, with a focus on antitrust. I explain the key points that General Counsels need to know about why and how to use screens in their corporations’ compliance program. This article, Why and How to Use Empirical Screens in Antitrust Compliance, is available at http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2006576.Â I discussed this topic at the American Bar Association Antitrust Spring Meetings, which took place in Washington DC last April, as a part of a panel on antitrust compliance. A summary of the panel’s presentation is available at ABA Section Panel Discusses Compliance Training in 21st Century, published April 6, 2012, BNA Antitrust and Trade Regulation Report, pages 424-25.
I expect that these concerns and investigations on the Libor and similar rates will become the triggering event for the implementation of these methods in compliance, but developments in the near future will either prove me right or not!
Hope you enjoy the reading!