Who Is More Effective, Wikileaks Or SEC?
Larry Doyle |DailyMarkets
If you were a senior accountant at a firm and suspected senior officials of perpetrating a fraud, would you run the risk of professional suicide and bring the information to the SEC or maintain cover and contact Wikileaks? What do you think? Do the right thing and hope you are protected or put your trust in the great equalizer known as Wikileaks?
Let’s not lose faith in Uncle Sam, right? Go straight to Washington and let them do their thing protecting America, yes? Well, maybe not.
Let’s check in with somebody who went to Washington while blowing the whistle on one of the greatest frauds in the history of our nation. Of whom do I speak? Sherron Watkins. Sherron, who? Remember Enron? Yes, Sherron blew the whistle on the boys at Enron a decade ago. What would she do now? Would she still call the SEC, even under their newly enhanced leadership? Great question. The Center for Public Integrity highlights that Sherron would take a different tact if she found herself in the same position today. CPI writes, Wikileaks More Effective Than SEC, Says Enron Whistleblower,
A former Enron accountant who blew the whistle on fraud at the energy giant says she doesn’t trust (LD’s edit: there’s that trust thing again) the Securities and Exchange Commission to handle tips from company insiders, even though the agency plans to offer a generous new bounty for information about fraud.
“I don’t think the SEC’s culture is one that will make this effective one iota,” said Sherron Watkins, a one-time vice president at Enron, referring to expanded protections for whistleblowers included in the Dodd-Frank financial reform law.
If she was in the same situation today as 10 years ago, when Watkins approached government authorities about accounting fraud at Enron, she would probably instead take her information to an organization like WikiLeaks, Watkins said.