Goldman May Not Be Paying Its Conflict Of Interest Reviewers Enough

Given all of the evidence to the contrary, it’s quite important for Goldman Sachs to go to great and visible lengths to appear ethical. To this end, it has established an executive office designed to foster such within its culture. And part of that is reviewing all of the work Goldman does for clients to ensure (not always successfully, obviously) all of that work is on the up-and-up, at least from a conflicts of interest standpoint. This conflicts resolution process of course involves having a look-see at all of the work Goldman is doing for clients and, well, funny story:

Mohammed Zina, 32 years old, was an analyst in the conflicts resolution group at Goldman Sachs when he allegedly used confidential information at the bank to make the equivalent of almost $200,000, or £142,000, with his brother on stock trades…. Some of the companies named by the FCA in its proceedings against the brothers were advised by Goldman on takeovers during that period, according to filings.

That’s a pretty serious ethical lapse from an ethics professional. Surely this brother is not allegedly guilty of an equally flagrant breach of professional expectations?

“Suhail Zina was a solicitor at Clifford Chance, also in London,” the FCA said in a statement on Tuesday…. Clifford Chance, a member of the elite group of “magic circle” law firms, said Suhail Zina left in 2018, declining further comment.

As it happens, however—in what one presumes must be an inadvertent conflicts discouraging way—junior conflicts resolution analysts apparently aren’t remunerated quite sufficiently to profit as much as they’d like from any insider-trading they might be tempted to do from their material non-public perch. Neither, we guess, are solicitors at magical circle law firms. And so they might have to do a bit of extra alleged fraud to really make things pay.

+263 242 744 677

4 Gunhill Avenue,

Goldman May Not Be Paying Its Conflict Of Interest Reviewers Enough