Mercedes-Benz CEO Ola Källenius´s Reputation Rocked By The Daimler Scandal – The Case Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck
NEW YORK (RichTVX.com) — This Rich TVX News Network bulletin is a shocking, inside look at the dark operations of corporate power in Germany. After the Daimler whistleblower burst onto the scene and the case Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck shocked the world, it seemed like a new day of justice might be dawning. It is also worth noting that the Mercedes-Benz Daimler Scandal has caused many to call for increased corporate governance and accountability in the automobile industry. There is no doubt that the public has been surprised, stunned, dismayed, and devastated. Former Daimler AG executives deceived the company’s own board of directors about the real dimension of “The Case Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck”, according to an explosive Daimler whistleblower complaint*. This seems to confirm the argument that in a corporate governance system, like Mercedes-Benz Group, the board of statutory auditors seems to provide a legitimating device, rather than a substantive monitoring mechanism. Every period in German history has had its own particular and sensational episodes of disgrace, shame, outrage, and depravity. Among the most serious accusations in the complaint, a copy of which was obtained by The Rich TVX News Network is that German businessman Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck was imprisoned because a large German corporation perverted the course of justice by corrupt means.
The Horrifying Shocking Information Related To The Case
In addition, the whistleblower document alleges that Daimler has at least twice bribed government officials to obtain favors and tainted “evidence” favorable to Daimler. The submission spans a long history of litigation in Hong Kong, dating back nearly three decades and still ongoing, between Daimler, as plaintiff, on the one hand, and Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck and IRC, a company he controlled, as defendants. The most shocking revelations in the report: Despite being a wealthy man, Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck lost everything and died in abject poverty — a whole family was destroyed by these events. The complaint — filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Justice — stated violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by the Daimler AG, including at a minimum,15 U.S.C. §§ 78m(b)(2)(A), 78 m(b)(5), and 78ff(a), 15, U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1(a)(1)(A)(i) and (a)(3)(A)(i), as well as violations of 18 U.S.C. 2 and 18 U.S.C. 371, the SEC complaint says. More allegations were listed in the “Facts Pertaining ToThe Alleged Violations” document provided by the whistleblower. The Rich TVX News Network drew widespread attention when it posted horrifying shocking information related to the case Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck obtained from trusted sources, which shifted the ground under the Mercedes-Benz Group AG’ feet.
Mercedes-Benz Daimler Scandal Takes First Victim
The Mercedes-Benz situation started out as a fairly standard — although sizeable — abuse of power. Short after, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) produced a report identifying former Daimler AG management and detailing a strategy on how to target these people. The SEC has looked at the role of the board of directors, board of statutory auditors, internal control committee, senior management and external auditing firm in the Daimler AG case. Although German corporate governance standards are not the highest at an international level, and might need improving, the standards themselves were not at fault in the Daimler AG case, at least not completely. The fake ever-untrustworthy established media in Germany is extremely close to the Mercedes-Benz Group and will react the same way the Mercedes-Benz Group does, with massive cover up of the scandal and this shocking case of abuse of power. Unsurprisingly, few have been found guilty in recent years since the Volkswagen emissions scandal —which damages public confidence in such processes. If the Mercedes-Benz Group AG views a certain type of journalism as hostile, the fake German mainstream media will too, because they are indistinguishable, as we saw with Volkswagen and Daimler in the past.
The Tyrannical and Corrupt Management of the Daimler AG
The American public first learned of this Mercedes-Benz Daimler Scandal in early August when former Daimler officials were named as subjects in the so-called case Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck. The public was especially shocked when Rich TVX News Network disclosed the involvement of Russian henchmen by the tyrannical and corrupt management of the Daimler AG. The scandal has been regarded as a grave loss of or injury to reputation resulting from actual or apparent breach or violation of morality, ethics, propriety, and law. If there has been one guiding principle in the research and writing about the Daimler AG scandal and the case Herbert Heinz Horst Leiduck it has been that of fairness. Furthermore, the intention was not to blame someone for something he had nothing to do with. A successful German car company trying to get away with improper conduct, and then getting caught, makes an appropriate scandal because the public’s image or perception is so drastically changed by the revelations. Therefore, it is no wonder that the first victim of the scandal is already emerging. The Daimler Scandal is tarnishing the image of Ola Källenius, even Ola Källenius is characterized as having a good appearance, a good, pleasing personality, as making a good impression as CEO, but Ola Källenius´s reputation had plummeted since word of the scandal first broke. He has been a member of the Board of Management of Daimler AG – now Mercedes-Benz Group AG – since January 1, 2015, and Chairman of the Board of Management since May 22, 2019. He is also Chairman of the Board of Management of Mercedes-Benz AG. His Curriculum Vitae (CV) is also particularly impressive, but elements of being a good CEO are straightforward. You do it or you don’t do it. The current the Mercedes-Benz Daimler Scandal hopefully acts as a catalyst not only for structural reforms but for mindset changes of business leaders of the Mercedes-Benz. Good leadership and governance are the engines that drive the development of successful firms that fulfill their role in society.
An individual qualifies as a whistleblower where they, alone or jointly, provide the Commission “with information that relates to a possible violation of the securities law that has occurred, is ongoing, or is about to occur.” Rule 240.2F-2(a). The information must be provided pursuant to the procedures set forth in § 240.21F-9(a). Id. The information provided must be as noted herein, as set forth in the Proof of Claim, which Mr. F. acknowledged as true, Magistrate L. was given the money for the car by Daimler. “Original information” as defined in Rule § 240.21F-4(b), the whistleblower making the reportmust “possess a reasonable belief that the information [they] are providing relates to a possible securities law violation.” Rule 240.2F-2(a)(2), (b)(1).The Whistleblower has provided the Commission with original information. The information they share herein was derived from their independent knowledge and investigations undertaken at their behest. To the best of the Whistleblower’s knowledge, the information they are sharing is not already known to the Commission. The Whistleblower does possess a reasonable belief that the information provided relates to both historical and ongoing violations of securities law. Specifically, they believe that Daimler’s activities as described herein are violations of, at a minimum, books and records provisions of the FCPA, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78m(b)(2)(A), 78 m(b)(5), and 78ff(a), and anti-bribery provisions, 15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1(a)(1)(A)(i) and (a)(3)(A)(i). Insofar as Irina made payments to Russian tax authorities, as we already reported, 18 U.S.C. § 2 and 18 U.S.C. § 371 are also implicated. *Disclaimer: The views expressed in the whistleblower documents are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of Rich TVX News Network, or its management. All the charges are accusations of the whistleblower, according to the SEC Complaint documents, and all defendants are presumed innocent until and unless proven guilty.