Securities Market Commission (CMVM) Chairman Luis Laginha de Souza said this Saturday that media coverage of Alexandra Reis leaving TAP does not affect the work of the capital market watchdog.
In January, CMVM announced that it was evaluating information provided by TAP about Alexandra Reis’s departure with “great caution”, adding that in the event of an administrative offense, it would be reported “as soon as possible”.
In an interview with radio Antena 1 and Jornal de Negócios, Laginha de Souza declined to say at what stage the oversight of CMVM is, limiting himself to making sure that the institution is attentive to everything that is published and that it can be of great value. for the process.
“We are not indifferent to what is happening around us, but it is not in the sense that we are conditioned. It is in the sense of understanding whether there are sometimes aspects that we can miss,” he said.
The president of CMVM also clarified that the role of the supervisor is not to assess whether a company’s decision was good or bad, but to ensure that investors “have the information that allows them to evaluate whatever they consider important and take action. their decisions.”
Regarding the role of the CMVM in this process, Laginha de Souza ensured that the market regulator has “everything very well documented” and that decisions are made “with the best interpretation and the best information available”.
At the first parliamentary budget and finance committee hearing as president of CMVM in January, Lajinho de Souza was interrogated several times about information provided by TAP to the financial market regulator about Alexandra Reis’s departure, the airline said. only the resignation of the admin in the information on the market, when it later became known that there were negotiations on the exit.
The vague answers of the person in charge caused dissatisfaction with several MPs, who kept repeating the question about the actions of the CMVM in the case and whether they believe that TAP provided incorrect information.
“The information available was not what it should be. Then the consequences that may or may not have in terms of an administrative offense is an analysis that needs to be carried out with great care,” said Laginha de Souza, adding that he cannot enter the case precisely because of the secrecy to which the CMVM is subject. but that it would “not take more time than is strictly necessary” to reach a decision.
In February 2022, TAP informed CMVM of the departure of administrator Alexandra Reis, citing that Alexandra Reis had stepped down from her position with the airline.
In December, Alexandra Reis assumed the position of State Secretary of the Treasury, after which she “spawned” controversy over the compensation she received when she left the state-owned airline (500 thousand euros).
In a written statement sent to Lusa the same month, Alexandra Reis stated that the termination agreement “as administrator of companies in the TAP universe” and the annulment of “the employment contract with TAP SA requested by TAP, as well as its public communication, has been agreed between legal teams on both sides tasked with ensuring that best practices are implemented and that all legal requirements are strictly observed.”
On December 28, TAP sent a new clarification to CMVM, stating that the resignation presented by Alexandra Reis “came after a negotiation process initiated by TAP, in the sense of reaching a consensus on an agreement to terminate all existing contractual relations. between Alexandra Reis and TAP.”
TAP Executive President (CEO) Christine Urmier-Widener said in Parliament in January that messages sent to CMVM about compensation for Alexandra Reis were advised by lawyers and guaranteed documents and “written evidence” about the entire process.
On March 6, the airline’s executive president and chairman of the board of directors, Manuel Beja, was fired by the government following the announcement of the results of an audit by the Inspector General of Finance (IGF), which concluded that the Alexandra Reis exit agreement was invalid and compensation of about half a million euros would have to be returned.