► Full Reference:
M.-A. Frison-Roche, "
Ne pas confondre process de conformité et Droit de la Compliance: les conséquences pratiques (Don't confuse compliance processes with compliance law: practical consequences)",
Newsletter MAFR Law, Compliance, Regulation, May 5, 2024 -
📧Read by freely subscribing other news of the
Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation - ► News summary : Reducing Compliance to conformity processes can be fatal for companies. Reading Norbert Alter's book on management in a two-pronged movement which, according to the author, has consisted on the one hand in draining companies of all process and control, and on the other hand in injecting learning about ethics, benevolence and concern for others, has been detrimental in that the first movement has systemically destroyed meaning, meaning which is then so difficult to inculcate. This is very instructive if we look at it from a legal perspective: in effect, it corresponds to what is happening between Compliance Law and Compliance Processes. In the latter case, we might even consider that it is “liability” in the legal sense that is at stake: the company would incur liability at the slightest failure of the non-compliance process, whereas Compliance Law, a branch teleologically built on the Monumental Goals that constitute its legal standards (preservation of systems, e.g. banking, financial, health, energy, digital, climate systems, etc.), implies only an obligation of means. Compliance law does not require companies to follow processes blindly and to the letter, but to demonstrate the effects that have already been achieved and that it is reasonably plausible that they will achieve in the future. In this respect, compliance is essentially a probationary obligation.
- 📧read the article published on 5 May 2024 on this topic in the
Newsletter MAFR – Law, Compliance, Regulation ⤵️ -
🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on LinkedIn 🌐follow Marie-Anne Frison-Roche on Instagram 🌐subscribe to the Newsletter MAFR Regulation, Compliance, Law