THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING

Verdicts mark end of corporate morality play

For prosecutors, case was all about accountability

By Brooke A. Masters and Carrie Johnson
The Washington Post / May 26, 2006
  • Email|
  • Print|
  • Single Page|
  • |
Text size +

WASHINGTON -- If there was one case the government had to make to define this as the era of corporate accountability, it was Enron.

But the Enron tale was complicated, with labyrinthine partnerships and intricate accounting entries, and no documents directly tying the guys at the top to the decisions carried out by others. It was a tough case to be a must win.

When the jury returned its verdict -- guilty on 25 of a combined 34 counts -- it was a clear win. Jurors refused to let slide the two former chief executives who had become synonymous with corporate corruption, and who tried to blame underlings, advisers, institutional investors and the media for the Houston energy company's spectacular 2001 collapse.

The convictions of former Enron chairman Kenneth Lay and ex-chief executive Jeffrey Skilling cap the Justice Department's five-year battle to hold top executives responsible for a flood of accounting fraud and corporate failures that undermined investor confidence, put tens of thousands out of work and hit the savings of millions of ordinary people.

Enron's 2001 bankruptcy exposed failures across the system of corporate governance, from audit companies that lacked true independence and board members who failed to ask skeptical questions to lawyers and bankers who blessed questionable deals in exchange for whopping fees. It also resulted in major changes to the regulatory system, including a federal law that requires top corporate executives to attest to the accuracy of financial statements.

When Enron was followed by a wave of scandals at firms such as WorldCom Inc., Tyco International Ltd., and Adelphia Communications Corp., it was not clear whether prosecutors and the Securities and Exchange Commission would be able to cope with the complexity and sheer numbers of the cases. But government lawyers slowly built their evidence and, after initial setbacks, learned to streamline their cases for juries. They won convictions of WorldCom chief executive Bernard J. Ebbers, Adelphia chairman John J. Rigas, and top executives of Tyco.

But none equaled the importance of Enron, where it all started and which involved the most complex financial and legal schemes.

``The ordinary investor uses the word Enron to scare their kids," said University of Texas law professor Henry T.C. Hu. ``These convictions are the end of a particularly important morality play."