Worldwide: UK And US Intervene in Greek Corruption Trial

Last Updated: 4 November 2019
Article by Shaul Brazil and Jonathan Flynn

Introduction

When Lisa Osofsky became the Director of the Serious Fraud Office ("SFO") last year, it was widely reported that she wanted to 'crack' more cases using plea agreements. In a speech in Washington DC on 4 December 2018, Ms Osofsky said: 

"...we in the UK have heard loud and clear from our colleagues in the United States how valuable co-operators can be in cracking white collar cases. We have different practices and different rules in Britain, and co-operators have, to date, been more widely used in narcotics or gang cases. Suffice to say, we are intently exploring this area in the white collar world."

What is less well known, however, is that whilst Ms Osofsky was extolling the virtues of plea agreements, Mr Dougall – the SFO's first co-operating defendant in a major overseas bribery and corruption case – was being prosecuted in Greece (using SFO-sourced material) for conduct that was part of, or wholly collateral to, his UK conviction.

Background

In March 2008, following a referral by the US Department of Justice ("DOJ"), the SFO began a criminal investigation into the affairs of DePuy International Ltd ("DPI"), a UK subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson ("J&J") which manufactures orthopaedic devices. The SFO's investigation concerned allegations that DPI had paid bribes to surgeons in the Greek orthopaedic market since at least 1997.

In June 2009, Mr Dougall, a former executive of DPI, entered into an agreement with the SFO pursuant to section 73 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 ("SOCPA")1, which required him to plead guilty to conspiracy to corrupt, and to co-operate fully with the SFO and any foreign competent judicial authority investigating the affairs of J&J/DPI.

In accordance with the terms of this agreement, Mr Dougall signed a witness statement setting out his entire knowledge of and involvement in the payment of bribes to orthopaedic surgeons in Greece. He also met with and provided a detailed account to the DOJ, which granted him a Non-Prosecution Agreement ("NPA") in the US.

In April 2010, Mr Dougall pleaded guilty at Southwark Crown Court. He was sentenced to an immediate term of 12 months' imprisonment, which was suspended on appeal.2 Ultimately, no other individuals were prosecuted in the UK or US in respect of the DPI/J&J investigation. However, in April 2011, DPI agreed to pay £4.8 million in the UK as part of a civil recovery action and in the US J&J entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement with the DOJ (the "J&J DPA").

The Greek proceedings

Notwithstanding Mr Dougall's conviction in the UK (and NPA in the US), a Greek Investigating Judge issued an Indictment against him in 2014. Whilst the Indictment made it clear that Mr Dougall should not be charged with bribery/corruption due to the principle of ne bis in idem (analogous to the principles of double jeopardy or autrefois convict), it proposed that he should nevertheless be charged with fraud and money laundering based on the same facts as his UK conviction. Significantly, the evidence relied on to 'prove' these charges was derived, in large part, from material provided by the SFO and UK Central Authority ("UKCA") to the Greek authorities by way of Mutual Legal Assistance ("MLA").

In May 2017, Mr Dougall was tried (alongside 19 others) before a three-judge panel, sitting as a court of first instance, at the Court of Appeal of Athens (the "Court"). His co-defendants included former DPI/J&J executives (most of whom were from the UK or US), retired orthopaedic surgeons, and Greek nationals who were allegedly involved in facilitating the payment of the bribes.

At the start of the trial, it was submitted on Mr Dougall's behalf that the fraud and money laundering charges were barred by the principle of ne bis in idem, and that the material provided by the SFO to the Greek authorities could not be used to prosecute him owing to the principles of specialty and privilege against self-incrimination.

Surprisingly, the Court reserved its ruling in respect of ne bis in idem until the conclusion of the trial. As regards the use of SFO-sourced material, the Court excluded Mr Dougall's witness statement (due to self-incrimination) and the majority of the SFO-sourced exhibits (due to specialty). However, the Court also ruled that, insofar as this material was referred to (including quoted verbatim) in investigation reports prepared by the Greek Financial and Economic Crime Unit (the "SDOE"), those reports and their contents could be used as evidence to prosecute Mr Dougall in Greece. The Court also permitted the Prosecutor to rely on the J&J DPA and Court of Appeal judgment in R v Dougall as 'evidence' of Mr Dougall's guilt.

SFO intervention

Having been made aware of the circumstances of Mr Dougall's prosecution in Greece, the SFO wrote to the Greek authorities on several occasions (both prior to and during the trial) expressing its concerns regarding the prosecution. These concerns centred on the fact that:

  1. the SFO had not consented to the use of SFO-sourced material to prosecute Mr Dougall in Greece (whether directly or indirectly via, for example, the SDOE reports);
  2. the SFO and UKCA had provided SFO-sourced material to the Greek authorities by way of MLA on the understanding that it would not be used against Mr Dougall in any criminal investigation or proceedings in Greece;
  3. the SFO would not have made the transmissions, or it would have expressly widened the undertaking required of the Greek authorities, if it had contemplated that this material would be used to prosecute Mr Dougall;
    1. the principle of specialty, founded on international comity and recognised as an essential component of MLA, required the Greek authorities to use SFO-sourced material only for the specific purpose permitted by the SFO or the UKCA;
    2. section 73 of SOCPA represents a long-standing, pragmatic policy in the UK whereby certain individuals involved in criminal offences receive lower sentences because they have assisted the authorities in the pursuit and prosecution of offenders bearing greater culpability;
    3. clearly there would be little incentive for an offender to assist the SFO if the potential reduction in sentence in the UK flowing from such co-operation were to be overridden by the risk of further prosecution and sentence in another jurisdiction; and
    4. accordingly, the Greek authorities' decision to prosecute Mr Dougall using SFO-sourced material for offences directly related to the facts underpinning his UK conviction, risked undermining section 73 of SOCPA, as well as the effectiveness of the SFO as a law enforcement authority.

The Court (and the Greek authorities generally) failed, however, to acknowledge these concerns. Consequently, in November 2018, the SFO's Associate General Counsel, Raymond Emson, agreed to appear before the Court as a witness in support of Mr Dougall's defence.

During his evidence, Mr Emson expanded on the SFO's concerns (as outlined above), emphasising the "unfairness" of prosecuting Mr Dougall in Greece for charges that were "to all intents and purposes" based on the same facts as those underpinning his UK conviction, and which were "founded substantially" on SFO-sourced material. He also explained how it was troubling that the "deep concerns" expressed by the SFO had "fallen on deaf ears".

When asked how many times a representative of the SFO had ever appeared as a witness in overseas proceedings, Mr Emson replied: "I'm not aware of any precedent, I'm not aware that the SFO has ever been forced effectively to appear in foreign proceedings, to intervene in this way."

DOJ intervention

As stated above, in addition to Mr Dougall's co-operation with the SFO, he also co-operated with law enforcement authorities in the US. Having been made aware of the proceedings in Greece, the DOJ wrote to the Court to endorse the SFO's position, describing how Mr Dougall had provided "key evidence" supporting the resolution of charges in the US against J&J, DPI and two additional companies engaged in similar conduct. The DOJ described Mr Dougall's co-operation as "extraordinary".

The verdict 

In July 2019, over two years after the trial began, Mr Dougall was acquitted of fraud (due to ne bis in idem) and money laundering (due to a lack of evidence). Thirteen of his co-defendants were convicted, including three former J&J/DPI executives (each sentenced to seven years' imprisonment). Although the written judgment has not yet been handed down, it seems likely that, in acquitting Mr Dougall, the Court took into account both the SFO's and DOJ's concerns.

Implications for Greek justice and jurisprudence

The Court's ruling was highly significant in Greece. In a case which concerned several jurisdictions, the Court was required to address unprecedented issues concerning cross-border cooperation in criminal investigations. For the first time, a Greek criminal court applied European Union jurisprudence relating to the principle of ne bis in idem (ruling that the principle was engaged where the alleged conduct was materially the same regardless of the legal characterisation of that conduct).

Furthermore, in applying the principles of specialty and privilege against self-incrimination in the context of mutual legal assistance, the Court implicitly recognised the importance of co-operation, trust and respect between countries in the fight against cross-border economic crime. It appears that the issues raised in this case prompted the issue by the Prosecutor of the Supreme Court in Greece of Circular No. 6/2019 which instructs all Greek prosecutors to respect the sovereign will of states from whom mutual legal assistance is sought and obtained.

Conclusion

The fact that the SFO and DOJ were willing to intervene in the Greek proceedings demonstrates the important public interest in supporting and protecting the position of co-operating defendants. The Greek court should be commended for ultimately respecting this important public interest. In relation to the SFO, its willingness to intervene was also perhaps due, in part, to its renewed commitment under Ms Osofsky's directorship to using more SOCPA agreements. Whilst it remains to be seen whether this strategy will ultimately help to 'crack' more SFO cases, one thing is clear: had Mr Dougall been convicted in Greece, the efficacy of the SOCPA regime would have been greatly undermined.

Footnotes:

1 A section 73 SOCPA agreement requires a suspect to plead guilty to an offence, but enables the court, when sentencing, to take into consideration the co-operation provided (resulting in a substantial reduction in sentence).

2 R v Dougall [2010] EWCA Crim 1048

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions