Ethics Newsline®

VANCOUVER

My wife and I spent last weekend readying the house for Thanksgiving. As the U.S. Senate knotted itself into agonies over the energy bill and Medicare legislation, I was washing skylights. While Eduard Shevardnadze resigned as president of the former Soviet republic of Georgia, I was cleaning the gutters. And despite a drumbeat of deadly news from Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Middle East, I carefully cleaned out a paint brush.

Working on into the waning Maine sunlight, I found myself pondering this disconnect. Here was I, enjoying the simple and intimate pleasures of home life, while so many millions were unable to do so. And here were our world leaders, groping to put in place new policies and programs. Would they make a difference? Was the world moving forward on the right moral track? If I believed it wasn’t, was it ethical to wile away a weekend doing ordinary things? Isn’t there every temptation, these days, to abandon normalcy and writhe with anguish?

That got me thinking about what Thanksgiving means — and realizing that, when it seems that the world is coming unstuck, it’s easy to overlook the giving of thanks for whatever is still together. I sometimes worry that in our Western culture, we’re perilously close to forgetting how to be thankful. I’m not just talking about the forgotten etiquette of penning thank-you notes or bringing hostess gifts. I’m talking about something deeper: Ours is a culture of edgy nay-saying, dominated by some low-grade, unexamined assumptions that all things are in tumult. We’re not very good at seeing goodness coming together — and thanking one another for it. Too often there’s a polarity in our public discourse. We too easily make decisions by finding out what’s wrong with a person, a policy, or a product so that, by default, we can choose the alternative. We’re more willing to assign blame than to credit noble motivation.

To balance that, I suspect, is one of the great purposes of Thanksgiving. In a culture proud of its ability to be critical — to see life whole, warts and all — Thanksgiving yanks us back from warts to all. It reminds us to express gratitude for the context of good that surrounds the bad.

But how do we do that? How do we express gratitude in a dangerous world without sounding hypocritical or naïve — and without descending into the pablum of platitude or the sap of sentimentality. After all, if gratitude has behind it no more philosophical depth than the greeting-card aisle at Wal-Mart, why take it seriously? If being grateful requires us to ignore evil in our determination to praise good, how can we justify the giving of thanks?

What’s needed is an ability to be thankful without losing our keen critical edge. But think about what critical means. It’s not just carping and censorious faultfinding. To criticize means to assess merits and demerits fairly and make an appropriate judgment. Think about literary or art criticism, requiring reasoned interpretation and discerning appreciation. Think about critical care, which refers to the help given at a potential turning point where a patient’s change can be abrupt and decisive. Critical also means significant, decisive, and essential.

For Thanksgiving 2003, we need to develop critical gratitude. We need the ability to give thanks decisively, even at a turning point with outcomes still unsure. We need to set aside our fascination with the problematic long enough to assess all that’s settled, calm, and valuable. We don’t have to abandon our sharp scrutiny of the world. And we certainly don’t have to be lulled into a false and hypnotic tranquility. But we do need to see life whole. We need to recognize the things that still work right.

Which brings me back to normalcy. One of the simplest ways to express gratitude is not by saying but by doing. There’s a place, in our troubled world, for the values that sustain the ordinary acts of kindness. There’s a reason to delight in the unexceptional. In the end, that’s the kind of life so much of the world is longing for. It’s not only about food and shelter and peace. It’s about the smaller pleasures that can only flourish when these are in place — pleasures as simple as a washed window or a clean brush.

(c)2003 Institute for Global Ethics

“All of us at The Times are fully aware of the many defects in Walter Duranty’s journalism, as we have and will continue to acknowledge. We regret his lapses, and we join the Pulitzer board in extending sympathy to those who suffered….”

– New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., discussing last week’s decision by the board of the Pulitzer Prize to not revoke the 1932 award given to Times reporter Walter Duranty, who is accused of deliberately ignoring a Ukrainian famine engineered by Soviet leaders. (“Pulitzer Board Won’t Void ‘32 Award to Times Writer,” New York Times, Nov. 22)

WASHINGTON
A number of scandal-bruised firms returned to headlines last week as lawsuits were filed, executives indicted, and balance sheets adjusted. Among the developments:

• Six former Kmart executives, including the firm’s former president and former chairman, were sued for allegedly draining the firm of more than $1 billion to pay for home improvements, nannies, chauffeurs, dental work, and private cars, even as the company slid into Chapter 11 bankruptcy. PricewaterhouseCoopers, which audited Kmart from 1993 until last month, also was sued for alleged negligence, reported the Detroit Free Press.
• Gary Pilgrim and Harold Baxter, the prominent cofounders of Pilgrim, Baxter, and Associates, last week were charged with civil fraud and breach of fiduciary duty for allegedly allowing two wealthy clients to engage in short-term trading and for sharing nonpublic information with outsiders. The charges are the latest to be filed in the expanding probe of mutual-fund fraud and wrongdoing, reported the New York Times.
• Freddie Mac, the nation’s No. 2 mortgage finance company, released adjusted balance sheets for the last three years, saying it had both understated and overstated revenues in various years to show a steady growth pattern favored by Wall Street’s analysts. Although the restatements are $4.5 billion in the firm’s favor, the announcement did little to stop calls for tougher government supervision of the congressionally chartered firm, reported the Washington Post.

MONTGOMERY, Alabama
An Alabama jury last week ordered oil giant Exxon Mobil to pay $11.9 billion for defrauding their state of oil royalties in a four-year-old case that the company vowed to appeal.

Alabama first filed charges in 1999 against Exxon, which later merged with Mobil, accusing the company of trying to skimp on royalties owed for natural gas produced from state wells, reported the Reuters news agency.

That trial ended in a $3.5 billion jury award against the oil company. After the Alabama Supreme Court overturned the case on a technicality, a retrial was ordered.

After four weeks of testimony and two days of deliberations, another jury last week ruled against Exxon Mobil, slapping the company with $11.86 billion in damages — $2.5 billion more than the award sought by state prosecutors, noted Reuters.

“We felt Exxon thought they were going to get away with this,” jury foreman Joe King told the Associated Press, which noted that Exxon deducted a $6,000 “family picnic” as an operating cost for the wells. “We wanted to send a message that they were not, and that this corporation can’t get away with doing wrong.”

Exxon Mobil lead counsel Sam Franklin denied any wrongdoing. “The company did not engage in fraud, no evidence of fraud was established at trial, and fraud should never have been considered by the jury,” Franklin insisted. “The punitive award in this case defies common sense.”

Many legal analysts agree with the last point, saying the verdict likely will be overturned or reduced on appeal, according to the Reuters report.

WASHINGTON
Federal authorities last week arrested 47 people for allegedly participating in a far-reaching currency trading scam that bilked common investors and powerful banks of millions of dollars.

The U.S. Justice Department charged many of those arrested with criminal counts of money laundering, conspiracy, securities fraud, wire fraud, bogus trades, and kickbacks.

Those detained in the undercover “Operation Wooden Nickel” included employees of J. P. Morgan Chase, UBS, Societe Generale, and Dresdner Kleinwort, though the firms themselves were not charged with any wrongdoing, reported CNN.

“With more than 1,000 victims from small investors to large banks, the losses are in the millions,” declared U.S. Attorney James Comey.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission are expected to file civil charges as well, noted CNN.

Special to Newsline from Canadian correspondent Errol P. Mendes

TORONTO
A report of a taskforce formed by Canadian securities regulators indicates that Canadian banks, law firms, and accounting firms advising Canadian companies on corporate takeovers are lax on preventing leaks of confidential information about the deals.

According to a Globe & Mail report, the taskforce concluded that this lax approach results in widespread insider trading on shares of Canadian companies.

The report also found that these professional firms do not have requirements in place to contain insider information that bankers, lawyers, and accountants learn about their corporate clients.

The taskforce was established by Canadian securities regulators to inquire into the perceived increase in illegal insider trading in Canada.

There were 289 insider-trading cases handled by Canadian securities regulators in the 2001-2002 period. However, there have been only a few successful prosecutions in these cases.

The taskforce also recommended that regulators of equity and derivative markets around the world coordinate their investigations of insider trading and share information.

The report also recommended that the Canadian federal government set up a special white-collar crime section focusing on illegal insider trading.

WASHINGTON
U.S. officials were pressed last week to investigate the Justice Department’s decision to send a Canadian citizen to Syria despite the likelihood that he would be tortured there — an act that, if proved, would be a violation of U.S. law.

Maher Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian citizen, was arrested in September 2002 at a New York airport while making a connection on his trip home to Montreal from Tunisia.

U.S. authorities, who suspected Arar of being allied with al Qaeda, jailed and interrogated him for 10 days before deporting him to Syria, where he was imprisoned and tortured for 10 months. Arar was finally returned to Canada after vigorous efforts by the Canadian government.

Canadian officials and Arar’s lawyers last week demanded further details of the U.S. government’s decision, which has been explained as a matter of national security.

The Justice Department’s handover, made with the agreement of the CIA, was part of a secret program of “rendition,” in which terrorism suspects are turned over to foreign countries for likely interrogation under torture, the Washington Post reported last week.

The Post quotes a U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity, who notes that U.S. immigration law explicitly forbids the removal of people — even in matters of national security — to a country where “it is more likely than not that they will be tortured.”

As recently as March 2003, a State Department report on Syria’s human rights practices noted that “there was credible evidence that security forces continued to use torture,” especially “while the authorities were attempting to extract a confession or information,” according to the Post.

Despite the probability that Arar would be tortured in Syria, the Justice Department and CIA said that transferring him would be “prejudicial to the interests of the United States,” U.S. officials told the Post.

Arar, who was finally released by Syria last month, said he was tortured with cables and electrical cords and kept in a grave-like cell.

“The removal of Mr. Arar was accomplished after interagency consultation and in full compliance with the law and with all relevant international treaties and conventions,” a Justice Department spokesman said.

Canada, which also has come under criticism for possibly helping the U.S. government in the matter, has asked U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell to explain the removal of Arar, reported the Post.

U.S. congressional leaders have given conflicting signals on whether they will investigate the matter. Although Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle (SD) has said an inquiry is warranted, Senate intelligence oversight committee member Trent Lott (R-Miss.) has disagreed, saying, “We don’t have time to do it.”

SEATTLE
A Seattle judge last week ruled that police are allowed to use deception and in some cases break the law when trying to obtain evidence, rejecting a lawsuit by a man tricked into supplying DNA evidence that ties him to an unsolved murder.

John Nicholas Athan, who has been charged with a 1982 rape-murder, sued the Seattle police after they pretended to be a law firm offering him money as part of a class-action case.

Athan agreed to take part in the bogus lawsuit, sending his agreement in an envelope that he sealed with saliva. Police received the envelope and used DNA from Athan’s saliva to link him to the unsolved 1982 case.

After being arrested in May, Athan sued on the ground that it is illegal for detectives to pose as lawyers, saying the fraud violated his rights, reported the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Judge Sharon Armstrong last week rejected Athan’s suit, saying police can skirt the law — buying drugs or paying for prostitutes, for instance — when trying to crack a case.

“The mere fact that the police violated the law in posing as lawyers does not require dismissal,” she wrote, according to the Post-Intelligencer report.

Athan’s lawyer said he would appeal the ruling, saying “the issues here are of great importance to the integrity of our legal system.”

LONDON
Following several suicides of children bullied at school, the U.K. government last week said it will begin scrutinizing schools’ anti-bullying efforts as part of official school inspections.

While schools already are required by law to address bullying, many are failing to do enough, the government’s young people’s minister, Ivan Lewis, told the BBC last week.

Lewis, talking about his own experiences of being bullied as a young student, said the government’s new anti-bullying charter is meant to make sure schools take the lead in addressing the issue.

“I think if there had been more of an up-front discussion about bullying … and messages to me which said, ‘If this is getting too much for you, come and chat to somebody,’ I think it would have helped in a big way,” Lewis told the BBC.

The government’s new anti-bullying charter, unveiled last week, pushes schools to take such steps, encouraging the creation of “safe places” for vulnerable students and “anxiety boxes” for anonymous complaints.

“Some schools are using very innovative approaches — for example, peer mentoring — where they’ve got young people training to be available to other young people, because sometimes you feel more able to share things with peers,” Lewis noted. But “every school needs to do more,” he said.

The new anti-bullying charter, which will become part of school inspections, sets forth “best practices” standards and must be signed by each school’s head teacher, chairman of governors, and a student representative.

The government then will assess “whether they are putting into practice the charter, the spirit of the charter, in terms of the action that they are taking,” Lewis told the Guardian.

“And let’s be clear, there are still people who have a view that this is part of growing up, it’s character building, and I don’t accept any of that,” Lewis added.

BRUSSELS
The European Parliament last week approved a measure urging the EU’s 15 member nations to approve the funding of controversial stem-cell research after the current moratorium expires on December 31.

The nonbinding referendum — approved by a 300-to-210 vote — recommends that EU states allow some of the Union’s $4.8 billion research budget to be used to study the potential windfall of medical advances that may be reaped from stem cells.

Critics of stem-cell research say that using surplus human embryos for research is unethical.

The parliamentary move sets the stage for contentious talks among EU nations, whose views on stem-cell research range from starkly opposed to mildly encouraging, reported the Associated Press.

EU ministers will meet in early December to decide their next steps, according to the Financial Times.

LONDON
Coca-Cola UK last week agreed to stop plugging its products to preteens via the TV, saying it recognized that it was putting inappropriate pressure on parents by prompting their kids to badger them for Coke products.

As the United Kingdom strains under a growing epidemic of U.S.-style obesity, high-sugar foods are being targeted by consumer advocates, who especially complain about youth marketing, reported the Independent.

Coca-Cola last week said it would heed those complaints, promising to pull its soda and drink commercial campaigns — dubbed “pester-power advertising” — from TV shows aimed at kids younger than 12.

“In the case of children under 12, the responsibility for consumption should be left in the hands of parents and guardians,” Coca-Cola UK communications director Martin Norris told the Independent.

The move comes on the heels of another announcement from Coke, which last week said it is considering stripping its in-school vending machines of logos and flashy graphics meant to encourage consumption. A field test of the idea is already under way in Scotland, noted the BBC.

Doug McAvoy, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers (NUT), last week welcomed Coke’s move, saying the NUT is “concerned that schools are increasingly under pressure to act as agents for food companies in ways that are potentially damaging to children’s health.”

Labor MP Debra Shipley (Stourbridge), a member of the Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport, agreed, complaining to the Independent about a Coke marketing campaign using Harry Potter.

“At last a manufacturer is recognizing this is a problem,” Shipley said. However, “there remains a need for legislation to prevent companies who continue to ruthlessly and aggressively target young children on television.”

Coke’s Martin Norris has defended the Harry Potter tie-in as an educational effort meant to encourage literacy.

BOSTON
Igniting a firestorm of controversy, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court last week voted 4-to-3 to overturn the state’s ban on same-sex marriage.

Writing for the majority, Chief Justice Margaret Marshall stated, “We declare that barring an individual from the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage solely because that person would marry a person of the same sex violates the Massachusetts Constitution.”

In its decision, the court gave the state legislature 180 days to carry out the ruling. Several state politicians, including Governor Mitt Romney, have suggested amending the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage, though the process would take several years and could not take effect until 2006 at the earliest.

In the meantime, Romney and other legislators are considering civil-union legislation as one way to meet the court’s ruling.

Romney told the Boston Globe, “I believe their decision indicates that a provision which provided benefits, obligation, rights, and responsibilities, which are consistent with marriage but perhaps could be called by a different name, would be in conformity with their decision.”

But Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law School strongly disagreed that such a plan would pass constitutional muster. “I think that the court could hardly have been clearer about the proposition that the basic definition of marriage has to be broadened for it to meet the requirements of the state constitution,” Tribe told the Globe. “Certainly just listing benefits won’t fit the court’s theme.”

Weekend polls in Boston found a majority of surveyed voters supporting last week’s ruling — with 50 percent agreed and 38 percent opposed, reported the Globe. A Boston Herald poll found similar results, according to the Associated Press.

A majority — 53 percent to 36 percent — also opposed Governor Romney’s intentions to block same-sex marriages by redefining the state constitution and implementing civil unions.

Last week’s decision stemmed from a suit brought by seven gay and lesbian couples against the state. Attorney Mary Bonauto of the Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders, a legal advocacy group that brought the suit on behalf of the couples, told USA Today, “Finally, all families in the Commonwealth (of Massachusetts) will have the opportunity to be equal families under the law.”

Last week’s ruling stirred up criticism, emotions, and rhetoric from elected officials, advocacy groups, and religious leaders, among others. Tony Perkins of the conservative Family Research Council, told the New York Times, “it is inexcusable for this court to force the state legislature to ‘fix’ its state constitution to make it comport with the pro-homosexual agenda of four court justices.”

Meanwhile, gay advocacy groups hailed the decision as a breakthrough for gay rights. “This is a tremendous victory for fairness and for families, David Tseng of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays told the Times.

From the Pew Research Center:

“Over the past four years, the American electorate has been dealt a series of body blows, each capable of altering the political landscape. The voting system broke down in a presidential election. A booming economy faltered, punctuated by revelations of one of the worst business scandals in U.S. history. And the country endured a devastating attack on its own soil, followed by two major wars.

“National unity was the initial response to the calamitous events of Sept. 11, 2001, but that spirit has dissolved amid rising political polarization and anger. In fact, a year before the presidential election, American voters are once again seeing things largely through a partisan prism. The GOP has made significant gains in party affiliation over the past four years, but this remains a country that is almost evenly divided politically - yet further apart than ever in its political values.

“The Pew Research Center’s longitudinal measures of basic political, economic, and social values, which date back to 1987, show that political polarization is now as great as it was prior to the 1994 midterm elections that ended four decades of Democratic control in Congress.

“But now, unlike then, Republicans and Democrats have become more intense in their political beliefs….

“The Pew Research Center’s political values survey … examines the core beliefs that form the basis of public opinion on a broad range of topics - foreign policy and civil liberties, religion and social values, government and voting, and other issues….”

“Two kinds of gratitude: the sudden kind we feel for what we take; the larger kind we feel for what we give.”

– Edwin Arlington Robinson (U.S. poet, 1869-1935)

Gender Parity Index (GPI) of access to primary and secondary schools (a GPI of 1 indicates parity between boys and girls; less than 1 indicates greater access for boys)

* * *

Source: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)report, “Education For All Global Monitoring Report,” released Nov. 5, 2003.

VANCOUVER
Can Pepsi learn anything from Kant?

The answer is unfolding in a public school near you. But don’t look for it in a humanities seminar or a business classroom. Look in the corner where they’ve put the vending machines. As obesity catches up with drugs, alcohol, and tobacco on North America’s health-risk list, there’s rising concern about selling soda and junk food to kids in schools. Result: The ethical issues surrounding vending machines are proliferating faster than quarters from a bill changer.

Consider the case of Nicholas Dodds, a 15-year-old student in Ontario. Two years ago, he filed briefs with Ontario’s Information and Privacy commissioner to force Pepsi and Coca Cola to reveal the contents of their contracts with two of the province’s largest school districts. Last week he won: The Commissioner ordered the boards to release the details.

The decision was cheered by those who worry that bad dietary habits may be linked to obesity. In the United States, where the Centers for Disease Control estimates that 13 percent of children are overweight, half of the nation’s school districts are thought to have contracts with cola companies. And look what’s happening:

• In California, where as many as 25 percent of children may be overweight, bans on soft-drink sales are already in place in Los Angeles, Oakland, and Berkeley school districts. Next July, that ban will spread to the entire state’s elementary, middle, and junior high schools, stopping soda sales during the school day.
• In September, New York City announced a five-year, $166 million contract with Snapple, the U.K.-based drink company, to replace soda with fruit drinks in its 1,200 schools and its other municipal buildings.
• Last June, the National PTA hit a buzz saw of controversy for giving the chief lobbyist of Coca Cola Enterprises, John Downs, Jr., a seat on its board, and for listing the company as one of its official sponsors.

Why would schools want soft-drink machines in the first place? The deal is straightforward: Promote our products, the soda firms say, and we’ll give you a share of profits amounting to tens of thousands of dollars a year. That’s a welcome windfall in an era when tight budgets have trimmed purchases of things like computers, library books, athletic equipment, and band instruments.

Built into some contracts, however, are incentives not only to offer but to promote these products. A confidential contract just made public between Pepsi and the Vancouver schools indicates how explicit those incentives were. According to the Vancouver Sun, the contract specified that “Increased consumption (equals) increased purchases (equals) increased revenue.” What’s in it for Pepsi? Not just short-term student purchases but long-term brand loyalty, as these students become adult customers.

Last week, I asked a number of educators here whether they could see any ethical (rather than financial) case for not banning soda sales in schools. Several of them cited the uncertainty of the research about links between junk food and obesity. Others noted the unfairness of banning soft drinks without banning other junk food. They also noted that the ban may miss the real source of obesity: their students’ sedentary habits and poor physical condition, as well as the cutbacks in funding for physical education. One of them also raised the issue of supervision. He worried that students who wanted junk food would find their way to nearby convenience stores anyway. He’d rather they remained in the building, where at least they would be under safe adult supervision.

But I didn’t sense deep enthusiasm for any of these arguments. Would these educators want to continue with such contracts if money weren’t the issue? The answer was a pretty emphatic no!

And that’s where young Nicholas Dodds and old Immanuel Kant come into play. “Students are not in schools so they can be used as a captive audience for Pepsi,” Dodds said. “They’re not there to be marketed to.”

Kant would be proud. In one formulation of his famous categorical imperative, the German philosopher laid down a relevant guide to ethical behavior: We ought always to treat others as ends, he said, not merely as means. So students aren’t to be treated as a means for soda-makers to meet their ends. They are, themselves, the fully dignified ends of their own being and should be treated as such.

At bottom, the issue isn’t just about soda and obesity. It’s about allowing any sort of marketing in schools, including ads on closed-circuit classroom television. Sure, it’s convenient. And it makes money. But taxpayers also need to treat students as Kant would want them to — not as a means to make up budget shortfalls by subjecting them to the soft-drink hard sell, but as representatives of the highest end any community can have: the moral education of its young.

(c)2003 Institute for Global Ethics

“This is not the case of a camera crew or reporter showing up just as something is breaking. It’s not just a snapshot. You get the whole before, during, and after. You get a clearer picture and a better story.”

– Miami Police Chief John Timoney discussing his plans to embed reporters with police squads keeping watch over this week’s large-scale trade talks, which are expected to draw tens of thousands of protesters. The Associated Press, Reuters, the Miami Herald, CNN, Fox, NBC, and several TV stations have been invited to participate, according to the AP.

* * * * *

“Journalists are supposed to be independent gatherers of information. (Embedding) is going to put journalists in the police view of the world. At least in a war theater you can make the arguments that there is no other way for journalists to have access to the battlefield. I don’t think that analogy holds on the streets of Miami.”

– Robert Jensen, associated professor of journalism law and ethics at the University of Texas at Austin, speaking to the AP about the police department’s plans. (“Police to Embed Journalists at Protests,” AP, Nov. 10)

CHICAGO
Stung by a series of ethics scandals and the resulting loss of several government contracts, Boeing Co. last week said it was forming an in-house ethics office that reports directly to the firm’s CEO.

The new unit — the Office of Internal Governance — will be headed by Bonnie Soodik, a current Boeing executive running a $3 billion unit, reported the Reuters news agency.

Giving her direct access to Boeing chairman and CEO Phil Condit is necessary to prove the company’s seriousness of purpose when dealing with reforms to its corporate culture, according to Condit.

“Today’s action reflects the full agreement of our board and our senior management team that the commitment to these important areas must be set at the very top,” Condit said in a statement.

The move followed a series of high-profile ethics scandals. Last January, the congressional General Accounting Office accused Boeing of stealing data from Raytheon while bidding for a weapons system contract in 1990. In July, the Air Force charged Boeing with using more than 25,000 documents stolen from Lockheed Martin when bidding for a $1.88 billion contract in 1998.

As punishment, Boeing was stripped of roughly $1 billion in launches and has been temporarily barred from receiving government contracts. Boeing admits possessing the Lockheed documents, but denies using them to get an unfair advantage over Lockheed, according to the Associated Press.

Currently, Boeing is caught up in a controversy over an Air Force plan to lease a fleet of Boeing 767s — a deal that critics say is a boondoggle riddled with conflict-of-interest breaches.

In separate news, Tyco International, another firm beset with ethics issues, last week said it has inked a deal to provide legal compliance and ethics training to its 260,000 workers, the AP reported.

Former Tyco head Dennis Kozlowski is on trial for bilking the Bermuda-based firm of $600 million.

PARIS
A Paris court last week handed down several long-awaited sentences in the high-profile trials of executives from Elf, the former state-owned oil company that became the center of a national corruption scandal.

Former Elf chairman Loik Le Floch-Prigent, 60, was sentenced to five years in prison and fined $435,000. His deputy, Alfred Sirven, 76, also received a five-year prison sentence and a fine of $1.16 million.

Andre Tarallo, 76, known as “Mr. Africa” for his role in facilitating Elf’s business on the continent, was sentenced to four years in prison and fined $2.3 million reported the Associated Press.

Le Floch-Prigent and Sirven, both of whom have admitted their roles in ELF’s extensive graft and bribery schemes, already are serving prison sentences for convictions in a related trial. Only Tarallo steadfastly has denied wrongdoing.

The men, accused of skimming Elf profits to finance lavish lifestyles during the late 1980s and early 1990s, say Elf’s corporate culture was rife with corruption and bribery by the time they arrived. They say they simply got caught up in the corrupt climate.

That argument won little leniency following four months of hearings, which ended in July. More than 30 other Elf executives and associates are on trial for similar charges.

Also sentenced last week was Le Floch-Prigents ex-wife, Fatima Belaid, who was convicted of accepting $5.3 million to keep quiet about the corruption following her divorce, which was paid for with illicit funds, according to the Agence France-Presse.

Belaid was sentenced to three years in prison, with two years suspended, and $1.16 million in fines.