The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

"Companies are not the public service of morality"

2020-12-29T19:02:11.425Z


FIGAROVOX / TRIBUNE - For the Vice-President of the Cercle Montesquieu Olivier Bélondrade, the role of a company is above all economic and not to be the guardian of a moral order. He points in particular to a reversal of case law of the Court of Cassation, which ruled that the buyer ...


Olivier Bélondrade is Vice-President of the Cercle Montesquieu.

This thunderclap is not only heavy with consequences for businesses.

It is also indicative of a deep but above all fatal trend.

Seizing the opportunity offered by a European decision, the highest French court has just reversed its case law and decided that, henceforth, in the event of a takeover of a company, the buyer could be criminally convicted for acts alleged against the company. company taken over.

To read also:

What will cost us the "Whatever it costs"

Two fundamental principles of French criminal law thus collapse for companies: those which stipulate that no one is responsible except for his own act and that criminal responsibility ends with the disappearance of the perpetrator of the offense.

We can only see in this judgment a compliance with the position of the Court of Justice of the European Union.

We can admit that a differentiation is made between legal person and natural person.

But we can only be alarmed, beyond the impact that this stop may have on mergers and acquisitions, the pernicious and dangerous drift of which he is one of the revealing.

This reversal of the Cour de cassation comes in addition to other regulatory changes, to other increasingly pressing injunctions from various backgrounds which all contribute to making companies bear responsibilities that should not be theirs. incumbent.

Thus, the Pacte law requires companies to take into consideration the social and environmental issues of their activity, an obligation which amounts to asking them to integrate the negative externalities of their activity themselves, a competence which, even among the most ardent supporters of the liberalism and the limitation of state intervention in the economy, falls under the latter.

Everything happens today as if we wanted to impose on companies a mission that is not theirs, that of becoming a kind of public service of morality

Likewise, when it comes to the fight against corruption, companies are required to develop a culture of ethics and self-control, which can be understood.

But, as if they were presumed guilty, we also demand of them that they self-incriminate and make themselves the moralists of the moral order vis-à-vis third parties and their partners.

Basically, everything happens today as if we wanted to impose on companies a mission that is not theirs, that of becoming a kind of public service of morality.

Of course, it is up to companies to be responsible and aware of their impacts.

Moreover, the evolution of mentalities and the pressures to which they are subject are such that in many cases this is enough to make them aware of the need to ban certain practices, in the very interest of their good relations with their stakeholders, in particular with their customers, who are increasingly vigilant and demanding.

Read also:

Recovery plan: "France is doing too little in relation to the scale of the looming crisis"

Perhaps it is necessary to recall the obvious?

Even if society assigns it more and more missions, the role of a company is above all economic, creating value, jobs, being a source of innovation.

It is by no means to be the guardian of the temple of any moral order.

To endorse such abuses and elevate them to the rank of law, we expose ourselves to multiple risks.

Economic risks for companies, of course, by making them lose sight of their main purpose.

This is how a French agribusiness flagship, believing it could defy the laws of the market, favored societal considerations.

Today the result is not there.

In the absence of a significant competitive advantage, the company is leading a drastic cost reduction program and a layoff plan.

The State discharges its material and moral obligations to control the rules it enacts and transforms each company into a prosecutor

Democratic risks too.

By using companies as relays for action and monitoring with the aim of normalizing behavior, the State discharges its material and moral obligations to control the rules it enacts and transforms each company into a prosecutor.

By discharging its responsibilities, it takes the risk that there are as many interpretations as there are companies and therefore that the overall consistency of the rule is sacrificed.

Is this really what we want?

Source: lefigaro

All news articles on 2020-12-29

You may like

Trends 24h

News/Politics 2024-03-27T16:45:54.081Z
News/Politics 2024-03-28T06:04:53.137Z

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.