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:
3/31/11
___
Item 1. Reports to Stockholders.
There were no changes to Item 1 the Report to Shareholders that was filed on May 31, 2011, accession number 0000930828-11-000006.
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 $41,636 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 and $41,315
for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010.
(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 $60,000 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 and $2,000 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. The services
for which these fees were paid included technical tax consultation for capital gain tax reporting to foreign governments, application of local country tax laws to investments, and derivative instruments.
(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 $44 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 and $0 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. 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 $144,756 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 and $0 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010. 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 $204,800 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 and $2,000 for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2010.
(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. (Asset Management)
in accordance
with the Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures (Policies) adopted by the investment
manager.
The
investment 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
investment manager’s instructions and/or policies. The investment manager votes
proxies solely in the interests of the Fund and its shareholders.
To
assist it in analyzing proxies, the investment 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 investment
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 investment manager does not consider recommendations from
RiskMetrics,
Glass Lewis
or any
other third party to be determinative of the investment manager’s ultimate
decision. As a matter of policy, the officers, directors/trustees and
employees of the investment 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 investment 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 investment 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
investment manager, if any, to an interdepartmental Proxy Review Committee
(which may include portfolio managers and/or research analysts employed by the
investment 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 investment
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 investment 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 investment manager rather than sending the
proxy directly to the Fund for approval.
To avoid certain
potential conflicts of interest, the investment 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, the rules thereunder or pursuant to any SEC exemptive orders
thereunder; (2) when the Fund invests uninvested cash in affiliated money
market funds pursuant to the rules under the 1940 Act or any exemptive orders
thereunder (“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 investment
manager considers in determining how proxies should be voted. However, the
investment manager
does not
consider recommendations from management to be
determinative of the investment 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 investment
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.
Investment
Manager’s proxy voting policies and principles
The investment 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
investment 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
investment 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 investment manager will generally vote
against management efforts to classify a board and will generally support
proposals to declassify the board of directors. The investment 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 investment 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 investment manager will closely scrutinize the
role and performance of auditors. On a case-by-case basis, the investment
manager will examine proposals relating to non-audit relationships and
non-audit fees. The investment 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
the shareholders’ long-term interests.
The
investment manager believes that executive compensation should be directly
linked to the performance of the company.
The
investment 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 investment 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 investment 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 investment manager will generally oppose “golden parachutes” that are
considered to be excessive. The investment 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 investment manager generally opposes anti-takeover
measures since they tend to reduce shareholder rights.
However, as with all proxy issues, the
investment
manager conducts an independent review of
each anti-takeover proposal.
On occasion, the investment 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 investment 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 investment manager will generally vote against any proposal to
issue stock that has unequal or subordinate voting rights. The investment
manager generally opposes any supermajority voting requirements as well as the
payment of “greenmail.” The investment manager generally supports “fair price”
provisions and confidential voting.
Changes to capital structure.
The investment 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
investment
manager will review, on a
case-by-case basis, proposals by companies to increase authorized shares and
the purpose for the increase. The
investment
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
investment
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
investment
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 investment manager will generally give management
discretion with regard to social, environmental and ethical issues, although
the investment 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 investment
manager’s proxy voting decisions for international investments. However, the investment
manager must be flexible in these instances and must be mindful of the varied
market practices of each region.
The investment
manager will attempt to process every proxy it receives for all domestic and
foreign issuers. However, there may be situations in which the investment
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
investment
manager may determine that it is not in the best
interests of the Fund to recall the security for voting purposes. Also, t
he investment manager may
abstain from voting under certain circumstances or vote against items such as
“Other Business” when the investment 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 26, 2011,
the portfolio managers of the Fund are as follows:
MARK MOBIUS, Ph.D,
Executive Chairman of Templeton Emerging Markets Group
and
Porfolio Manager of Asset Management
Dr. Mobius has been a lead portfolio
manager of the Fund since inception. Dr. Mobius 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 Asset
Management
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 Asset Management
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,
2011.
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
|
11
|
9,923.9
|
32
|
36,832.7
|
12
|
3,493.9
|
Dennis Lim
|
7
|
7,189.8
|
4
|
1,406.9
|
2
|
307.1
|
Tom Wu
|
6
|
7,180.6
|
4
|
2,160.2
|
0
|
N/A
|
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