Annual Corporate Governance Report 2017

63 The body charged with the management, surveillance, coordination and integration of corporate policies and actions aimed at complying with all applicable legislation and regulations (both external and internal protocols and procedures), as well as supervision of compliance with the Code of Conduct. Internal conduct regulation in securities market matters. f. Internal Code of Conduct on Matters Relating to the Securities Markets g. Compliance Officer for Crime Prevention This highly specific position involves providing appropriate advice to Atresmedia executives and directors on any decisions that might involve consequences as to criminal liability. Likewise, he/she is in charge of the operating coordination of the measures required to apply the Code of Conduct and to execute the decisions adopted by the Regulatory Compliance Committee. Lastly, he/she is the head of the implementation of a crime prevention programme within Atresmedia. 6. Officers All the System risks and controls have identified the officers in charge, who in line with the assessment schedule defined in each case must periodically implement the control procedures established for each risk. Aside from the risk and control heads, the figure of supervisor has been defined, charged with approving/rejecting the assessment of risks and controls performed by the heads at each time. 7. Testing and evidence plans All controls included in the System have defined a test plan that must be executed and completed by the control officer on each of the control assessment dates defined. Additionally, the System requires that the execution of the controls performed in each period be supported by documentary proof. This enables the full control assessment performed by the heads to be put in place and verified, where appropriate, and to have a documentary system of all the controls performed in each period. E.5. Atresmedia, through its publishing company, which is a wholly owned subsidiary and is a member of the SGAE, is the publisher of some of the musical works broadcast on Atresmedia channels. For this reason, it is entitled to the share due to the publisher when the SGAE settles the respective royalty payments. Moreover, authors whose works are published by Atresmedia’s publishing company under co-publishing contracts, which are filed with the SGAE prior to broadcast and are therefore compliant with its requirements, are entitled to the amount due to them on the basis of the tariffs and the co-publishing contracts, by way of royalties. This scheme, which is publicly known to have operated in recent years on a widespread and uncontroversial basis for television and radio alike, enables audiovisual operators to recover a portion of the royalties paid to the SGAE to the extent that they are actually involved in the creation of copyright through their publishing subsidiaries. Among musicians, the SGAE and the media, this business practice is colloquially known as “the wheel”. Against this background, some decisions of the management organs of the SGAE relating directly to the criteria applicable to the distribution of royalty proceeds, the recent request for the extraordinary involvement of an arbitral tribunal appointed by the World Intellectual Property Organization Arbitration and Mediation Center and the subsequent arbitral award have been widely challenged in the courts, where proceedings are now ongoing. On 19 June 2017 one of the divisions of the Audiencia Nacional (National Court) made an order to enter and search the homes of several authors and other parties related to the engagement under contract for television of musical authors and works. These court proceedings at criminal law affected Atresmedia directly in the person of its musical rights management officer and indirectly in connection with Atresmedia’s continuing relationship with the SGAE as to settlements for musical broadcasts on television in off-peak time slots, as mentioned earlier. Under the court ruling, the Atresmedia executive affected by the criminal proceedings is described as having close personal ties with the rest of persons charged. The criminal conduct that is alleged to have occurred is the purported influence of that executive over a specific group of authors: those whose works are broadcast over TV and who therefore defend common and legitimate interests as before the SGAE, which logically converge with certain specific interests of television operators. However, after the executive made a statement (on the same day as the police intervened), he was released without need of any further assurances. Since then, he has not been called upon to appear in court, and the court has not ordered any other proceedings affecting him. No criminal charges have been brought against Atresmedia, nor have any other proceedings been brought against it as a corporation, other than a demand that it disclose certain information to the court, as addressed to the rest of television operators on identical terms so that they provide equivalent documents, in so far as the practice under