UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM N-CSR/A
CERTIFIED SHAREHOLDER REPORT OF REGISTERED MANAGEMENT
INVESTMENT COMPANIES
Investment Company Act file
number
811-08788
Templeton Russia and East European Fund, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)
300 S.E. 2
nd
Street, FORT LAUDERDALE, FL 33301-1923
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)
Craig S. Tyle, One Franklin Parkway, San Mateo, CA 94403-1906
(Name and address of agent for service)
Registrant's telephone number, including area code:
(954)
527-7500
_
Date of fiscal year end: _
3/31
Date of reporting period:
3/31/10
___
Item 1. Reports to
Stockholders.
There were no changes to Item 1 the Report to Shareholders
that was filed on May 27, 2010, accession number 0000930828-10-000007.
Item
2. Code of Ethics.
(a) The
Registrant has adopted a code of ethics that applies to its principal executive
officers and principal financial and accounting officer.
(c) N/A
(d) N/A
(f)
Pursuant
to Item 12(a)(1), the Registrant is attaching as an exhibit a copy of its code
of ethics that applies to its principal executive officers and principal
financial and accounting officer.
Item 3. Audit Committee
Financial Expert.
(a)(1) The
Registrant has an audit committee financial expert serving on its audit
committee.
(2) The
audit committee financial expert is David W. Niemiec and he is
"independent" as defined under the relevant Securities and Exchange
Commission Rules and Releases.
Item 4.
Principal Accountant Fees
and Services.
(a) Audit Fees
The
aggregate fees paid to the principal accountant for professional services
rendered by the principal accountant for the audit of the registrant’s annual
financial statements or for services that are normally provided by the
principal accountant in connection with statutory and regulatory filings or
engagements were $40,830 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 and $41,215
for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009.
(b) Audit-Related Fees
There were no fees paid to the principal accountant for assurance and related services rendered by the principal accountant to the registrant that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit of the registrant's financial statements and are not reported under paragraph (a) of Item 4.
There were no fees paid to the principal accountant for assurance and related services rendered by the principal accountant to the registrant's investment adviser and any entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit of their financial statements.
(c) Tax Fees
There were no fees paid to the principal accountant for professional services rendered by the principal accountant to the registrant for tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning.
The aggregate fees paid to the principal accountant for professional services rendered by the principal accountant to the registrant’s investment adviser and any entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant for tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning were $2,762 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 and $4,000 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009. The services for which these fees were paid included tax compliance and advice.
(d) All Other Fees
The aggregate fees paid to the principal accountant for products and services rendered by the principal accountant to the registrant not reported in paragraphs (a)-(c) of Item 4 were $0 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 and $248 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009. The services for which these fees were paid included review of materials provided to the fund Board in connection with the investment management contract renewal process.
The aggregate fees paid to the principal accountant for products and services rendered by the principal accountant to the registrant’s investment adviser and any entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant other than services reported in paragraphs (a)-(c) of Item 4 were $0 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 and $283,829 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009. The services for which these fees were paid included review of materials provided to the fund Board in connection with the investment management contract renewal process.
(e) (1) The registrant’s
audit committee is directly responsible for approving the services to be
provided by the auditors, including:
(i) pre-approval of
all audit and audit related services;
(ii) pre-approval of
all non-audit related services to be provided to the Fund by the auditors;
(iii) pre-approval of
all non-audit related services to be provided to the registrant by the auditors
to the registrant’s investment adviser or to any entity that controls, is
controlled by or is under common control with the registrant’s investment
adviser and that provides ongoing services to the registrant where the
non-audit services relate directly to the operations or financial reporting of
the registrant; and
(iv) establishment by
the audit committee, if deemed necessary or appropriate, as an alternative to
committee pre-approval of services to be provided by the auditors, as required
by paragraphs (ii) and (iii) above, of policies and procedures to permit such
services to be pre-approved by other means, such as through establishment of
guidelines or by action of a designated member or members of the committee;
provided the policies and procedures are detailed as to the particular service
and the committee is informed of each service and such policies and procedures
do not include delegation of audit committee responsibilities, as contemplated
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, to management; subject, in the case
of (ii) through (iv), to any waivers, exceptions or exemptions that may be
available under applicable law or rules.
(e) (2) None of the services provided to the registrant described in paragraphs (b)-(d) of Item 4 were approved by the audit committee pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(i)(C) of Rule 2-01 of regulation S-X.
(f) No disclosures are required by this Item 4(f).
(g) The aggregate non-audit fees paid to the principal accountant for services rendered by the principal accountant to the registrant and the registrant’s investment adviser and any entity controlling, controlled by or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant were $2,762 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010 and $288,077 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2009.
(h) The registrant’s audit committee of the board has considered whether the provision of non-audit services that were rendered to the registrant’s investment adviser (not including any sub-adviser whose role is primarily portfolio management and is subcontracted with or overseen by another investment adviser), and any entity controlling, controlled by, or under common control with the investment adviser that provides ongoing services to the registrant that were not pre-approved pursuant to paragraph (c)(7)(ii) of Rule 2-01 of Regulation S-X is compatible with maintaining the principal accountant’s independence.
Item
5. Audit Committee of Listed Registrants.
Members of the Audit Committee are: Ann Torre Bates, Frank
J. Crothers, David W. Niemiec and Constantine D. Tseretopoulos.
Item
6. Schedule of Investments.
N/A
Item
7
.
Disclosure of Proxy Voting
Policies and Procedures for Closed-End Management Investment Companies.
The board of directors of the
Fund has delegated the authority to vote proxies related to the portfolio
securities held by the Fund to the Fund’s manager
Templeton Asset Management Ltd. (TAML)
in accordance with the
Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures (Policies) adopted by the manager.
The manager has delegated
its administrative duties with respect to the voting of proxies to the Proxy
Group within Franklin Templeton Companies, LLC (Proxy Group), an affiliate and
wholly owned subsidiary of Franklin Resources, Inc. All proxies received by
the Proxy Group will be voted based upon the manager’s instructions and/or
policies. The manager votes proxies solely in the interests of the Fund and its
shareholders.
To
assist it in analyzing proxies, the manager subscribes to RiskMetrics Group
(RiskMetrics), an unaffiliated third-party corporate governance research
service that provides in-depth analyses of shareholder meeting agendas, vote
recommendations, recordkeeping and vote disclosure services.
In addition, the
manager subscribes
to Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC (Glass Lewis), an
unaffiliated third-party analytical research firm, to receive analyses and vote
recommendations on the shareholder meetings of publicly held U.S. companies.
Although RiskMetrics’
and/or
Glass Lewis’
analyses are thoroughly reviewed and considered in making a final voting decision, the manager does not consider recommendations from RiskMetrics,
Glass Lewis
or any other third party to
be determinative of the manager’s ultimate decision. As a matter of policy,
the officers, directors/trustees and employees of the manager and the Proxy
Group will not be influenced by outside sources whose interests conflict with
the interests of the Fund and its shareholders. Efforts are made to resolve
all conflicts in the interests of the manager’s clients. Material conflicts of
interest are identified by the Proxy Group based upon analyses of client, distributor,
broker dealer and vendor lists, information periodically gathered from
directors and officers, and information derived from other sources, including
public filings. In situations where a material conflict of interest is
identified, the Proxy Group may defer to the voting recommendation of
RiskMetrics,
Glass Lewis
or those of
another independent third-party provider of proxy services; or send the proxy
directly to the Fund with the manager’s recommendation regarding the vote for
approval. If the conflict is not resolved by the Fund, the Proxy Group may
refer the matter, along with the recommended course of action by the manager,
if any, to an interdepartmental Proxy Review Committee (which may include
portfolio managers and/or research analysts employed by the manager), for
evaluation and voting instructions. The Proxy Review Committee may defer to the
voting recommendation of RiskMetrics,
Glass
Lewis
or those of another independent third-party provider of proxy
services; or send the proxy directly to the Fund. Where the Proxy Group or the
Proxy Review Committee refers a matter to the Fund, it may rely upon the
instructions of a representative of the Fund, such as the board or a committee
of the board.
Where a material
conflict of interest has been identified, but the items on which the manager’s
vote recommendations differ from Glass Lewis, RiskMetrics, or another
independent third-party provider of proxy services relate specifically to (1)
shareholder proposals regarding social or environmental issues or political
contributions, (2) “Other Business” without describing the matters that might
be considered, or (3) items the manager wishes to vote in opposition to the
recommendations of an issuer’s management, the Proxy Group may defer to the
vote recommendations of the manager rather than sending the
proxy
directly to the Fund for approval.
To avoid certain
potential conflicts of interest, the manager will employ echo voting, if
possible, in the following instances: (1) when the Fund invests in an
underlying fund in reliance on any
one of Sections 12(d)(1)(E), (F), or (G) of the 1940 Act, or pursuant to an SEC exemptive order; (2) when
the Fund invests uninvested cash in affiliated money market funds pursuant to
an SEC exemptive order (“cash sweep arrangement”); or (3) when required
pursuant to the Fund’s governing documents or applicable law. Echo voting
means that the investment manager will vote the shares in the same proportion
as the vote of all of the other holders of the Fund’s shares.
The
recommendation of management on any issue is a factor that the manager
considers in determining how proxies should be voted. However, the manager
does not consider recommendations from
management to be
determinative
of the manager’s ultimate decision. As a matter of practice, the votes with
respect to most issues are cast in accordance with the position of the
company's management. Each issue, however, is considered on its own merits,
and the manager will not support the position of the company's management in
any situation where it deems that the ratification of management’s position
would adversely affect the investment merits of owning that company’s shares.
Manager’s
proxy voting policies and principles
The manager has adopted general proxy voting guidelines,
which are summarized below. These guidelines are not an exhaustive list of all
the issues that may arise and the manager cannot anticipate all future
situations. In all cases, each proxy will be considered based on the relevant
facts and circumstances.
Board
of directors.
The
manager supports an independent board of directors, and prefers that key
committees such as audit, nominating, and compensation committees be comprised
of independent directors. The manager will generally vote against management
efforts to classify a board and will generally support proposals to declassify
the board of directors. The manager may withhold votes from directors who have
attended less than 75% of meetings without a valid reason. While generally in
favor of separating Chairman and CEO positions, the manager will review this
issue as well as proposals to restore or provide for cumulative voting on a
case-by-case basis, taking into consideration factors such as the company’s
corporate governance guidelines or provisions and performance.
Ratification
of auditors of portfolio companies.
The manager will closely scrutinize the role and
performance of auditors. On a case-by-case basis, the manager will examine
proposals relating to non-audit relationships and non-audit fees. The manager
will also consider, on a case-by-case basis, proposals to rotate auditors, and
will vote against the ratification of auditors when there is clear and
compelling evidence of accounting irregularities or negligence.
Management
and director compensation.
A company’s equity-based compensation plan should be in alignment with
its shareholders’ long-term interests.
The
manager believes that executive compensation should be directly linked to the
performance of the company.
The manager
evaluates plans on a case-by-case basis by considering several factors to
determine whether the plan is fair and reasonable, including the RiskMetrics
quantitative model utilized to assess such plans and/or the Glass Lewis
evaluation of the plans. The manager will generally oppose plans that have the
potential to be excessively dilutive, and will almost always oppose plans that
are structured to allow the repricing of underwater options, or plans that have
an automatic share replenishment “evergreen” feature.
The
manager will generally support employee stock option plans in which the
purchase price is at least 85% of fair market value, and when potential
dilution is 10% or less.
Severance
compensation arrangements will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, although
the manager will generally oppose “golden parachutes” that are considered to be
excessive. The manager will normally support proposals that require a
percentage of directors’ compensation to be in the form of common stock, as it
aligns their interests with those of shareholders.
Anti-takeover
mechanisms and related issues.
The manager generally opposes anti-takeover measures
since they tend to reduce shareholder rights.
However, as with all proxy issues, the manager conducts an
independent review of each anti-takeover proposal.
On occasion, the manager may
vote with management when the research analyst has concluded that the proposal
is not onerous and would not harm the Fund or its shareholders’ interests. The
manager generally supports proposals that require shareholder rights’ plans
(“poison pills”) to be subject to a shareholder vote and will closely evaluate
such plans on a case-by-case basis to determine whether or not they warrant
support. In addition, the manager will generally vote against any proposal to
issue stock that has unequal or subordinate voting rights. The manager
generally opposes any supermajority voting requirements as well as the payment
of “greenmail.” The manager generally supports “fair price” provisions and confidential
voting.
Changes to capital structure.
The
manager realizes that a company's financing decisions have a significant impact
on its shareholders, particularly when they involve the issuance of additional
shares of common or preferred stock or the assumption of additional debt.
The
manager will review, on a case-by-case basis, proposals by companies to
increase authorized shares and the purpose for the increase. The manager will
generally not vote in favor of dual-class capital structures to increase the
number of authorized shares where that class of stock would have superior
voting rights. The manager will generally vote in favor of the issuance of
preferred stock in cases where the company specifies the voting, dividend,
conversion and other rights of such stock and the terms of the preferred stock
issuance are deemed reasonable.
Mergers and corporate restructuring.
Mergers and acquisitions will be subject to careful
review by the research analyst to determine whether they would be beneficial to
shareholders. The manager will analyze various economic and strategic factors
in making the final decision on a merger or acquisition. Corporate
restructuring proposals are also subject to a thorough examination on a
case-by-case basis.
Social
and corporate policy issues.
The manager will generally give management discretion
with regard to social, environmental and ethical issues, although the manager
may vote in favor of those that are believed to have significant economic
benefits or implications for the Fund and its shareholders.
Global
corporate governance.
Many of the tenets discussed above are applied to the manager’s proxy
voting decisions for international investments. However, the manager must be
flexible in these instances and must be mindful of the varied market practices
of each region.
The
manager will attempt to process every proxy it receives for all domestic and
foreign issuers. However, there may be situations in which the manager cannot
process proxies, for example, where a meeting notice was received too late, or
sell orders preclude the ability to vote.
If
a security is on loan, the manager
may determine that
it is not in the best interests of the Fund to recall the security for voting
purposes. Also, t
he manager may abstain from
voting under certain circumstances or vote against items such as “Other
Business” when the manager is not given adequate information from the company.
Shareholders may view the
complete Policies online at franklintempleton.com. Alternatively, shareholders
may request copies of the Policies free of charge by calling the Proxy Group
collect at (954)527-7678 or by sending a written request to: Franklin
Templeton Companies, LLC, 500 East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1500, Fort
Lauderdale, FL 33394, Attention: Proxy Group. Copies of the Fund’s proxy
voting records are available online at franklintempleton.com and posted on the
SEC website at www.sec.gov. The proxy voting
records are updated each year by August 31 to reflect the most recent 12-month
period ended June 30.
Item 8. Portfolio Managers of Closed-End Management
Investment Companies.
(a)(1) As of May 27, 2010,
the portfolio managers of the Fund are as follows:
MARK MOBIUS, Ph.D,
Managing Director of TAML
Dr. Mobius has been a lead portfolio
manager of the Fund since inception. He has primary responsibility for the
investments of the Fund, and has final authority over all aspects of the Fund's
investment portfolio, including but not limited to, purchases and sales of
individual securities, portfolio risk assessment, and the management of daily
cash balances in accordance with anticipated management requirements. The
degree to which he may perform these functions, and the nature of these
functions, may change from time to time. He joined Franklin Templeton
Investments in 1987.
DENNIS LIM,
Co-Chief Executive Officer and Director of TAML
Based in Singapore, Mr. Lim has been a portfolio manager of the Fund since 2000, providing research and advice on the purchases and sales of
individual securities, and portfolio risk assessment. He joined Franklin Templeton Investments in 1990.
TOM WU,
Director of TAML
Based in Hong Kong, Mr. Wu
has been a portfolio manager of the Fund since inception, providing research and advice on the purchases and
sales of individual securities, and portfolio risk assessment. He joined Franklin Templeton Investments in 1987.
(a)(2) This section reflects
information about the portfolio managers as of the fiscal year ended March 31,
2010.
The following table shows the
number of other accounts managed by each portfolio manager and the total assets
in the accounts managed within each category:
Name
|
Number of Other Registered Investment
Companies Managed
|
Assets of Other Registered
Investment Companies Managed
(x $1 million)
|
Number of Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles Managed
1
|
Assets of Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles Managed
(x $1 million)
1
|
Number of Other Accounts
Managed
1
|
Assets of Other Accounts
Managed
(x $1 million)
1
|
Mark Mobius
|
9
|
9,030.7
|
34
|
25,042.6
|
9
|
2,311.2
|
Dennis Lim
|
6
|
6,896.5
|
5
|
1,066.9
|
2
|
319.5
|
Tom Wu
|
6
|
6,896.5
|
4
|
1,819.9
|
1
|
170.8
|
1. The various
pooled investment vehicles and accounts listed are managed by a team of
investment professionals. Accordingly, the individual managers listed would
not be solely responsible for managing such listed amounts.
Portfolio managers that
provide investment services to the Fund may also provide services to a variety
of other investment products, including other funds, institutional accounts and
private accounts. The advisory fees for some of such other products and
accounts may be different than that charged to the Fund and may include
performance based compensation. This may result in fees that are higher (or
lower) than the advisory fees paid by the Fund. As a matter of policy, each
fund or account is managed solely for the benefit of the beneficial owners
thereof. As discussed below, the separation of the trading execution function
from the portfolio management function and the application of objectively based
trade allocation procedures help to mitigate potential conflicts of interest
that may arise as a result of the portfolio managers managing accounts with
different advisory fees.
Conflicts.
The management of multiple funds, including the Fund,
and accounts may also give rise to potential conflicts of interest if the funds
and other accounts have different objectives, benchmarks, time horizons, and
fees as the portfolio manager must allocate his or her time and investment
ideas across multiple funds and accounts. The manager seeks to manage such
competing interests for the time and attention of portfolio managers by having
portfolio managers focus on a particular investment discipline. Most other
accounts managed by a portfolio manager are managed using the same investment
strategies that are used in connection with the management of the Fund.
Accordingly, portfolio holdings, position sizes, and industry and sector
exposures tend to be similar across similar portfolios, which may minimize the
potential for conflicts of interest. As noted above, the separate management of
the trade execution and valuation functions from the portfolio management
process also helps to reduce potential conflicts of interest. However, securities
selected for funds or accounts other than the Fund may outperform the
securities selected for the Fund. Moreover, if a portfolio manager identifies a
limited investment opportunity that may be suitable for more than one fund or
other account, the Fund may not be able to take full advantage of that
opportunity due to an allocation of that opportunity across all eligible funds
and other accounts. The manager seeks to manage such potential conflicts by
using procedures intended to provide a fair allocation of buy and sell
opportunities among funds and other accounts.
The structure of a portfolio manager’s compensation may
give rise to potential conflicts of interest. A portfolio manager’s base pay
and bonus tend to increase with additional and more complex responsibilities
that include increased assets under management. As such, there may be an
indirect
relationship between a portfolio manager’s
marketing or sales efforts and his or her bonus.
Finally, the management of personal accounts by a portfolio
manager may give rise to potential conflicts of interest. While the funds and
the manager have adopted a code of ethics which they believe contains
provisions reasonably necessary to prevent a wide range of prohibited
activities by portfolio managers and others with respect to their personal
trading activities, there can be no assurance that the code of ethics addresses
all individual conduct that could result in conflicts of interest.
The manager and the Fund have
adopted certain compliance procedures that are designed to address these, and
other, types of conflicts. However, there is no guarantee that such procedures
will detect each and every situation where a conflict arises.
Compensation.
The manager
seeks to maintain a compensation program that is competitively positioned to
attract, retain and motivate top-quality investment professionals. Portfolio
managers receive a base salary, a cash incentive bonus opportunity, an equity
compensation opportunity, and a benefits package. Portfolio manager
compensation is reviewed annually and the level of compensation is based on
individual performance, the salary range for a portfolio manager’s level of
responsibility and
Franklin Templeton
guidelines
.
Portfolio managers are provided no
financial incentive to favor one fund or account over another. Each portfolio
manager’s compensation consists of the following three elements:
Base salary
Each portfolio manager is paid a base salary.
Annual
bonus
Annual bonuses are structured to align the interests of the portfolio
manager with those of the Fund’s shareholders. Each portfolio manager is
eligible to receive an annual bonus. Bonuses generally are split between cash
(50% to 65%) and restricted shares of a Franklin
Templeton fund which vest over a three-year period (17.5% to 25%) and other mutual fund shares (17.5% to
25%). The deferred equity-based compensation is intended to build a vested
interest of the portfolio manager in the financial performance of both
Resources and mutual funds advised by the manager. The bonus plan is intended to provide a competitive
level of annual bonus compensation that is tied to the portfolio manager
achieving consistently strong investment performance, which aligns the
financial incentives of the portfolio manager and Fund shareholders. The Chief Investment Officer of the manager and/or
other officers of the manager, with responsibility for the Fund, have
discretion in the granting of annual bonuses to portfolio managers in
accordance with Franklin Templeton guidelines. The following factors are generally used in determining bonuses under
the plan:
§
Investment performance.
Primary consideration is given to the historic
investment performance over the 1, 3 and 5 preceding years of all accounts
managed by the portfolio manager. The pre-tax performance of each fund managed
is measured relative to a relevant peer group and/or applicable benchmark as
appropriate.
§
Non-investment performance.
The more qualitative contributions of a portfolio
manager to the manager’s business and the investment management team, including
business knowledge, contribution to team
efforts, mentoring of junior staff, and contribution to the marketing of the
Fund, are evaluated in determining the
amount of any bonus
award.
§
Research.
Where the portfolio management
team also has research responsibilities, each portfolio manager is evaluated on
the number and performance of
recommendations over time.
§
Responsibilities.
The characteristics and
complexity of funds managed by the portfolio
manager are factored in the manager’s appraisal.
Additional long-term equity-based compensation
Portfolio managers may also be awarded restricted
shares or units of one or more mutual funds, and options to purchase common
shares of a Franklin Templeton fund. Awards of such deferred equity-based
compensation typically vest over time, so as to create incentives to retain key
talent.
Portfolio managers also
participate in benefit plans and programs available generally to all employees
of the manager.
Ownership
of Fund shares.
The
manager has a policy of encouraging portfolio managers to invest in the funds
they manage. Exceptions arise when, for example, a fund is closed to new
investors or when tax considerations or jurisdictional constraints cause such
an investment to be inappropriate for the portfolio manager. The following is
the dollar range of Fund shares beneficially owned by each portfolio manager
(such amounts may change from time to time):
Portfolio Manager
|
Dollar Range of Fund Shares Beneficially Owned
|
Mark Mobius
|
None
|
Dennis Lim
|
None
|
Tom Wu
|
None
|
Note: Because the portfolio
managers are all foreign nationals, they do not hold shares in the U.S. registered Fund, however they own shares in other similar Franklin Templeton funds
managed by them, registered offshore and appropriate for foreign nationals.
Item 9. Purchases of Equity Securities by Closed-End
Management Investment Company and Affiliated Purchasers. N/A
Item 10. Submission of
Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
There have been no changes to the procedures by which
shareholders may recommend nominees to the Registrant's Board of Directors that
would require disclosure herein.
Item 11. Controls and
Procedures.
(a)
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and
Procedures
. The Registrant maintains disclosure controls and
procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be
disclosed in the Registrant’s filings under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and the Investment Company Act of 1940 is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the periods specified in the rules and forms of the Securities
and Exchange Commission. Such information is
accumulated
and communicated to the Registrant’s management, including its principal
executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosure. The Registrant’s management,
including the principal executive officer and the principal financial officer,
recognizes that any set of controls and procedures, no matter how well designed
and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired
control objectives.
Within 90 days prior to the
filing date of this Shareholder Report on Form N-CSR, the Registrant had
carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of
the Registrant’s management, including the Registrant’s principal executive
officer and the Registrant’s principal financial officer, of the effectiveness
of the design and operation of the Registrant’s disclosure controls and
procedures. Based on such evaluation, the Registrant’s principal executive
officer and principal financial officer concluded that the Registrant’s
disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
(b)
Changes in Internal
Controls
. There have been no
significant changes in the Registrant’s internal controls or in other factors
that could significantly affect the internal controls subsequent to the date of
their evaluation in connection with the preparation of this Shareholder Report
on Form N-CSR.
Item 12. Exhibits.
(a)(1)
Code of Ethics
(a)(2)
Certifications pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 of Laura F. Fergerson, Chief Executive Officer -
Finance and Administration, and Mark H. Otani, Chief Financial Officer and
Chief Accounting Officer
(b)
Certifications pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 of Laura F. Fergerson, Chief Executive Officer - Finance and
Administration, and Mark H. Otani, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting
Officer
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
TEMPLETON RUSSIA AND EAST EUROPEAN FUND, INC.
By /s/
LAURA F. FERGERSON
Laura F. Fergerson
Chief Executive Officer - Finance and
Administration
Date
November 29, 2011
Pursuant to the requirements
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, this
report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
By /s/
LAURA F. FERGERSON
Laura F. Fergerson
Chief Executive Officer - Finance and
Administration
Date
November 29, 2011
By /s/
MARK H. OTANI
Mark H. Otani
Chief Financial Officer and
Chief Accounting Officer
Date
November 29, 2011
Templeton Russia (NYSE:TRF)
과거 데이터 주식 차트
부터 11월(11) 2024 으로 12월(12) 2024
Templeton Russia (NYSE:TRF)
과거 데이터 주식 차트
부터 12월(12) 2023 으로 12월(12) 2024