Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting

Reply to Benkei

Really, EU CSRD compliance law?

A man of your talents.

Reply to boethius Yes, it's unfortunately in the job description and I can't offload it unto someone else. :cry:

Reply to Benkei

Well, be careful not to choke on your ambitions.

I have no experience with this, though a fair amount of experience in compliance in general.

My trying to help might not be so useful to you, but maybe some diversion for us both.

What sort of questions or processes are you trying to work out?

I can have a crack a it. If I come up with the same answers as you, then maybe that increases your confidence somewhat in your conclusions, and if not then we have learned absolutely nothing from the experience and you're no worse off.

In exchange, I'm dealing with my own legal issues of being under investigation since 2021 for defamation for reporting money laundering to the auditor, which is a ridiculous statement, but the law turns into basically a topsy-turvy Alice and Wonderland adventure when reporting people clearly laundering money and destroying evidence (that I still had a copy of, so that was really stupid).

Just to give you an example of how crazy it gets, when I point out the claims of defamation against me are clearly harassment and also used to extort me as I was told I'm under investigation and would be going to prison if I didn't sign a severance package giving up all "claims and pursuit", and what is obviously money laundering and plenty other crimes in the circumstances, police investigating me for crime literally committed to writing:

Finnish Police:
Hello,

You can always contact a lawyer and ask them about the situation and if they will present you. But in this particular case, you won’t be assigned one so you have to take care of that yourself.

Regarding your counter claims. I have also talked with the leader of the investigation and if you feel like you are a victim of a crime or want to report a crime, you can make a new police report about the matter. But it won’t be handled in this same case and case number I have contacted you about. This case number of 5680/R/6414/22 is about [plaintiffs]’s claims against you.

[Mr. Corrupt]
Senior constable
Central Finland Police Department

As you may expect, in Finland investigations are supposed to be impartial and neutral (therefore taking into consideration the suspect is actually the victim and the law is being abused by money launderers and police to shut the victim up about that), which is stated quite clearly right in the Criminal Investigations Act:

Finland'sCriminal Investigations Act:
Chapter 4 – Criminal investigation principles and the rights of persons participating in the criminal investigation
Section 1 – Principle of neutrality
Facts and evidence both for and against the suspect in the offence shall be clarified and taken into account in the criminal investigation.
Section 2 – Presumption of innocence
In a criminal investigation, the suspect in the offence shall be presumed not guilty.

Aka: I'm supposed to be presumed not-guilty and therefore entirely possible I am in fact the victim, and anyways facts (such as money laundering and threatening me with jail time if I didn't sign a severance package and drop all claims and pursuit, in exchange for both 1 000 000 Euros and "all my legal problems solved"), as it common sense.

It's supposed to be a pretty amazing risk that can easily blow up in your face if you commit crimes and then go and get the victim put under investigation ... and then threaten the victim with prison if they don't sing your deal.

So, not sure what sort of advice you could provide, but at minimum I'm confident you will anyways be entertained.

Anyways, obviously can't do much work as a corporate executive being under criminal investigation, so I have plenty of time on my hands to get into the nuances of EU compliance law.

So, I propose this deal.

Reply to Benkei

And just to make good on my promise of mirthful pleasure, in response to Mr. Corrupt, senior constable, clearly committing to writing that crimes committed against me (including the use of the law to harass me and extort me into signing severance) wont' be part of his investigation, I had to "go philosophy on him" and wrote this dialogue for the benefit of his soul:

Of course, after explaining the money laundering and all the crimes there's clear evidence for:

Actual email sent to police in a criminal investigation into myself:

[Dear Mr. corrupt]

But if you are curious, how I see police actions in this affair:

Police see some corporate board race starting about share ownership and money laundering and email access and shit.

One horse is a mystery box [because I had already reported the above crimes before a criminal complaint was made against me and police never phoned me about what I reported, just went ahead and placed me under investigation, including for defamation to an auditor].

Police are just like ... hmm, I'm going to bet against the mystery box.

Someone says (obviously no one actually did, but for literary purposes): don't you want to see what's in the mystery box before going all in against them, could be just a normal looking horse which may easily win against all these odd looking horses [because the people laundering money are absolute morons].

Police: nah, nah, no need to look, anything in a mystery box is clearly nothing to be concerned about.

Socrates: And is life worth living for us with that part of us corrupted that just action harms and unjust action benefits; So one must never do wrong… Nor must one, when wronged, inflict wrong in return, as the majority believe, since one must never do wrong. But verily, gentle Constable Meletus, you should still probably at least see what's in the mystery box, for it is certainly not some trick designed to fool the gullible if you yourself created the mystery box for no discernible reason or motive. And what is there to fear? Certainly you would have no problem trusting to your own faculties that whatever you see in the mystery box will not fool you but provide additional information in your decision to predetermine the result of criminal reports without doing any investigation at all. Seems a dangerous game constable Meletus.

Police: nah, mystery box we created must stay, we are fully committed to avoid seeing or knowing anything about the horse in the mystery box before deciding they for sure can't possibly win, and to bet significantly agains them in a way that creates stakes for us of which no reward function even exists if we be right or wrong [all local police should do about a report about corporate money laundering is send it to the national police who have jurisdiction over those kinds of things].

Socrates: but Constable Meletus, you crass fool! certainly it's an offence to reason and the gods to take on such blind risks, to harm oneself and others, without even there being any benefits to you! How can siding with injustice, or taking such a risk, not even for any benefit of which a avid man may understand the action, but merely it seems on the principle that injustice is preferable to justice. That you do this in the garments of a police officer makes the offence to reason and, I dare say, Hades itself, certainly all the more destable in the eyes of your peers if you turn out to be wrong in you gamble! All the more baffling Constable Meletus, I must say I truly do not understand. What you seem to say is that injustice must be defended on principle and justice rebuked with significant risks and no benefits to yourself! But how can that be! Say it ain't so Meletus.

Police: Yolo bitches. I grip it and I rip it Socrates. New time new rules. You wouldn't get it. When there's a mystery box that has the potential, once opened, to cause all sorts of troubles, people in our time let it lie, see what happens later: climate change, enabling money laundering, over fishing, destroying forests, gain of function research on dangerous pathogens. We always roll the dice regardless of the risks or whether there's even any benefits to ignoring potential problems down the line. It's called being a baller Socrates, and bigger the unnecessary risks, bigger the balls, higher the views, ca-ching, ca-ching Socrates! We're talking fucking cold, hard, cash, Socrates. But in this case not real cash, at least not for us, just the people laundering money who don't pay us, but some sort of mystical coin none-the-less.

The author: Well, I gotta go, but I'll try to continue this dialogue later, but I think you get the point.

What's even more hilarious is Mr. Corrupt, senior constable, recuses himself or is anyways taken off the case when I follow up later.

Socrates strikes again.