Politics Mean Little to Human Rights Foundation Founder Thor Halvorssen

The work of Thor Halvorssen has seen him become one of the best known human rights activists in the world after the Venezuelan born activist developed his own position in the community. Thor has seen his position as an activist reach respected levels after his presentations at the United Nations, the U.K. Houses of Parliament, and regular appearances at the TEDTalks events across the globe. Despite the success he has achieved Thor has made it clear in recent years he has little time for politics and harbors no ambitions to follow other members of his family into political life.

The political history of the family of Thor Halvorssen is extremely varied and includes time spent living and working for the betterment of communities across South America and northern Europe. Thor Halvorssen’s paternal grandfather made waves in Europe during World War II when he was the Admiral of the Norwegian Merchant Navy at the time the Nazi’s occupied the country; Halvorssen’s ancestor dispatched the navy to the neutral country of Venezuela to avoid them falling into German hands.

Describing himself as a classical liberal the New York based film producer has looked to report on human rights atrocities taking place across the world regardless of the political leanings of the government standing accused; Halvorssen recently publicized the human rights abuses committed in his native Venezuela and in Cuba by socialist governments he believes are often ignored by his fellow human rights activists.

Despite his success as an activist and growing reputation for impressive appearances on many different news networks the political ambitions of Thor Halvorssen simply lie in assisting others living in closed societies. Thor does not even look to question the political leanings of the staff he employs at the Human Rights Foundation, instead choosing to focus on the dedication shown to the cause of human rights. In discussing any possible political career Thor Halvorssen has already explained he sees no reason why he should look to become a politician as he wishes only to halt the human rights abuses he sees taking place across the planet.

Laidlaw and Company’s lack of Fiduciary Care

Laidlaw and Company were recently smacked with an injunction in US Federal Court to discontinue the distribution of false and misleading materials relevant to the operations of Relmada Therapeutics.

Laidlaw is the primary investment banker for Relmada and as such, that position mandates that Laidlaw adheres to their fiduciary responsibility to it. Both to Relmada and also to Laidlaw clients and stockholders.

The unique circumstances that having this position hold are the ability to control both sides of the financial scene. The misleading information will induce stockholders to rid themselves of their shares which can also induce the panic selling to a feeding frenzy, all of which lead to an inflated commission, increased revenue for Laidlaw and also more profits for its stockholders.

The issue of whether the materials distributed by Laidlaw were in fact misleading, false or in any way harmful to Relmada is only a secondary issue in this lawsuit. Rather, the issue taking precedence should be that of having undue influence.

While fiduciary duties are clear on either side of the issue also clear is the understanding of what this responsibility and duty is, Laidlaw has the added responsibility to protect the interests of its own stockholders.

Mr. Ahern has a history of accusations against him regarding the manipulation of his role as a financial advisor dating back to 2005, all of which have been settled in favor of the client. Mr. Eitner doesn’t have the track record as Ahern; he has been accused of improper transactions in a client account on two occasions, both of which were settled to the benefit of the clients.

A better choice of actions by Eitner, Ahern and Laidlaw would be quietly steering clients away from Relmada if they don’t think it’s a suitable investment for their portfolio. On the other hand, Laidlaw has the common responsibility to not harm or disrupt the business potential of Relmada.

I feel that the intention and spirit of the laws regarding fiduciary responsibility were intended to protect the interests of the public at large and not to be used as a tool to manipulate the price of stocks for personal profit or to the detriment of other business The actual validity of the information disseminated by Laidlaw is for a court to decide, but not for Laidlaw.

I would not want for any company that I did business with to have the enormous control and influence that Laidlaw apparently has over Relmada.