Worldwide: Top Ten International Anti-Corruption Developments For January 2017

In order to provide an overview for busy in-house counsel and compliance professionals, we summarize below some of the most important international anti-corruption developments from the past month, with links to primary resources. This month we ask: Which countries are perceived to be the most and least corrupt? Which company was sentenced to the largest corporate criminal penalty in UK history? Which two companies entered into Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) resolutions for the second time? The answers to these questions and more are here in our January 2017 Top Ten list.

1. UK-based Engineering Group Enters Into $800 Million Global Settlement to Resolve Bribery Charges.

On January 17, 2017, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that Rolls-Royce plc ("Rolls-Royce"), the UK-based designer, manufacturer, and distributor of power systems for the aerospace, defense, marine, and energy sectors, had agreed to an $800 million global resolution with U.S., UK, and Brazilian authorities, to resolve charges related to a scheme to pay bribes to government officials in various countries in exchange for government contracts. The company entered into a three-year Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with DOJ in connection with a one-count criminal information, filed in the Southern District of Ohio, charging it with conspiring to violate the FCPA's anti-bribery provisions. According to the information, between 2000 and 2013, the company conspired to pay more than $35 million in bribes to officials in Thailand, Brazil, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Angola, and Iraq in exchange for their assistance in obtaining confidential information and awarding contracts. Citing the company's cooperation and remediation, DOJ agreed to a criminal penalty of $169.9 million, reflecting a 25 percent reduction off the bottom of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines range, plus a credit of $25.6 million based on the penalty agreed to with Brazilian authorities. The company agreed to pay $30 million of the total penalty to the Consumer Financial Fraud Fund. In the Brazilian proceeding, Rolls-Royce entered into a leniency agreement with the Brazilian Ministério Público Federal (MPF) in which it agreed to pay a penalty of approximately $25.6 million for the company's role in a conspiracy to bribe foreign officials in Brazil between 2005 and 2008.

Also on January 17, 2017, Southwark Crown Court in London approved a five-year DPA with the UK Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in which Rolls-Royce agreed to pay $604.8 million in connection with an indictment, suspended for the term of the agreement, which covers 12 counts of conspiracy to corrupt, false accounting, and failure to prevent bribery. This represents the largest British fine ever imposed on a company for criminal conduct and the SFO's third approved DPA. As explained in our client alert, the company received the DPA and a 50 percent discount off the potential fine in spite of allegedly aggravating factors such as the widespread nature of the criminal conduct, the involvement of senior employees, and substantial illicit funds paid, based on mitigating factors such as extensive cooperation, including a limited waiver of privilege over internal interview memoranda, and remediation through enhancement of the company's ethics and compliance program and disciplinary proceedings. The $604.8 million fine included a penalty, disgorgement, and payment of the SFO's costs.

2. Transparency International Releases Annual Corruption Perceptions Index, Cuts Ties with U.S. Chapter.

  • TI Releases Corruption Perceptions Index. On January 25, 2017, Transparency International (TI) released its annual Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). The CPI scores and ranks 176 countries based on perceived levels of public sector corruption, providing an important source of data used by the compliance and enforcement communities in assessing the corruption-related risks of doing business in particular countries. This year, Denmark and New Zealand tied for the top-ranking spot, perceived as the least corrupt countries, while Somalia was in last place. Qatar had the largest decline in ranking, dropping 10 points (71 to 61), likely because of its association with the FIFA corruption scandal around the 2022 World Cup, in addition to allegations of human rights labor-related abuses of migrant workers. According to TI, over two-thirds of the 176 countries in the 2017 index scored below 50—the mid-point between "highly corrupt" (0) and "very clean" (100)—with a global average score of 43, indicating "endemic corruption." (See our January 2016 Top Ten for a summary of last year's CPI.)
  • TI Cuts Ties with U.S. Chapter. On January 10, 2017, TI's board of directors decided to disaccredit its U.S. chapter, Transparency International-USA (TI-USA), which was established in 1993. TI-USA issued a statement regarding its disaffiliation on January 23, 2017, in which it confirmed that it would become a national membership organization due to its "fundamentally different strategy and approach to combatting bribery and corruption." The chairman of TI-USA stated, "[w]e are converting our structure to become a national membership organization that will be a broadly based coalition dedicated to fighting against corruption wherever it occurs, locally, nationally, and internationally." TI confirmed the disaffiliation in a statement released on January 24, 2017, citing "differences in philosophies, strategies, and priorities between the former chapter and the Transparency International Movement."

3. U.S.-based Medical Device Company Settles "Repeat" FCPA Allegations.

On January 12, 2017, Indiana-based Zimmer Biomet Holdings Inc. agreed to pay $30 million to settle parallel DOJ and SEC investigations into what SEC referred to as "repeat" violations of the FCPA related to conduct in Brazil and Mexico. DOJ announced that the company entered into a DPA, in which it agreed to pay a criminal penalty of $17.46 million and to maintain a compliance monitor for three years, and that a subsidiary, JERDS Luxembourg Holding S.ár.l. (JERDS), will plead guilty to a one-count criminal information, charging it with causing the parent company to violate the FCPA's books and records provision. The DOJ resolutions were filed in the District of Columbia. Zimmer Biomet also agreed to pay SEC $6.5 million in combined disgorgement and prejudgment interest and a $6.5 million penalty pursuant to an administrative order. In March 2012, Biomet, previously a separate company, had resolved allegations with DOJ and SEC relating to conduct in Argentina, Brazil, and China. DOJ had extended the three-year DPA, which included a monitor requirement, in March 2015 and April 2016. The Zimmer Biomet resolution is therefore a rare example of a successive DPA and a successive monitor requirement.

4. Texas-based Medical Device Company Resolves Brazil FCPA Allegations.

On January 18, 2017, SEC announced that medical device company Orthofix International had agreed to admit wrongdoing, pay more than $6 million in combined disgorgement and penalties, and retain an independent compliance monitor for one year, to resolve allegations that it made improper payments to doctors at government-owned hospitals in Brazil to increase sales. According to the SEC order, the company's Brazilian subsidiary entered into multiple schemes to make improper payments through third-party commercial representatives and distributors to induce doctors at government-owned hospitals to use the company's products. SEC alleged that the improper payments were improperly recorded in the parent company's books and records and that the parent company's internal controls were inadequate, despite the fact that the company had previously been charged by SEC with violating the FCPA. In 2012, the company had agreed to pay $7.4 million to resolve charges that it violated the FCPA's accounting provisions in connection with bribes paid to Mexican officials by its Mexican subsidiary. In a separate SEC order also announced on January 18, 2017, the company agreed to pay an $8.25 million penalty to resolve allegations relating to improper booking of revenue. Four former executives at Orthofix agreed to pay penalties to settle cases related to the accounting failures, which caused the company to materially misstate certain financial statements. Both of the January 18, 2017 orders included relatively rare admissions of wrongdoing by Orthofix. The company also announced that DOJ had declined to take further action with respect to the FCPA matter. Nevertheless, the SEC resolution is another relatively rare instance of a second FCPA resolution for the same company.

5. Chile-based Mining and Chemical Company Resolves Chile FCPA Allegations.

On January 13, 2017, DOJ and SEC announced that Sociedad Quimica y Minera de Chile S.A. (SQM) had agreed to pay a total of $30.5 million to resolve allegations that it had made approximately $15 million in donations to dozens of foundations controlled by or closely tied to Chilean politicians, including a Chilean official with influence over the government's mining plans in Chile, between 2008 and 2015. As part of the DPA with DOJ filed in the District of Columbia, the company admitted to knowingly failing to implement internal controls sufficient to ensure that its payments complied with Chilean law and to falsifying its books and records to conceal the payments and agreed to pay a $15.5 million criminal penalty and to retain a corporate compliance monitor for two years. According to DOJ, the company received a 25 percent reduction off the low end of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines because, although it did not voluntarily disclose the conduct, it fully cooperated with U.S. authorities once news of an investigation by Chilean prosecutors emerged and because it undertook "substantial and ongoing remediation." SEC settled the case through an administrative order in which it agreed to pay an additional $15 million civil penalty. SQM's ADRs trade on the New York Stock Exchange.

6. U.S. and UK-based Food Giant Resolves India FCPA Allegations.

On January 9, 2017, SEC announced that Illinois-based Mondelēz International and UK-based Cadbury Limited—a former issuer that was acquired by Mondelēz's predecessor, Kraft Foods Inc., in February 2010—had agreed to resolve allegations related to improper payments allegedly made by Cadbury's Indian subsidiary. According to SEC's order, in 2010, the Indian subsidiary paid an agent to obtain from Indian government officials licenses and approvals to build additional production facilities, without conducting appropriate due diligence on the agent, monitoring the agent's activities, or accurately recording the nature of the services rendered by the agent. Notably, the administrative order does not allege that improper payments were ever made to Indian government officials, but rather that the subsidiary's shortcomings "created the risk that funds paid to [the agent] could be used for improper or unauthorized purposes." Without admitting or denying the charges, the companies agreed to pay $13 million to settle the charges. This resolution may contain an interesting application of the concept of successor liability. Because Cadbury itself was an issuer, it was subject to the FCPA's accounting provisions and, therefore, SEC's jurisdiction. SEC specifically noted in the order that, "[a]s a result of Mondelēz's subsequent acquisition of Cadbury stock, Mondelēz is also responsible for Cadbury's violations," which sounds like successor liability for pre-acquisition conduct. However, the order also alleges that the agent submitted five inaccurate invoices in and after February 2010, which sounds more like liability for post-acquisition conduct.

7. Nevada-based Casino Operator Resolves China and Macao FCPA Allegations.

On January 19, 2017, DOJ announced that Las Vegas Sands Corporation had agreed to enter into a three-year non-prosecution agreement (NPA) and pay a $6.96 million criminal penalty to resolve charges that it violated the FCPA's accounting provisions in connection with business transactions in China and Macao. According to the NPA, between 2006 and 2009, the company paid approximately $5.8 million to a business consultant who assisted it with promoting its brand in Macao and China, without any discernable legitimate business purpose. The consultant was used to disguise the company's involvement in the purchases of a Chinese basketball team and a building in Beijing. Although the company did not self-disclose the improper conduct, DOJ stated that the penalty reflects a 25 percent discount off the bottom of the applicable U.S. Sentencing Guidelines fine range, based on the company's full cooperation and remediation. Notably, the resolution follows nine months after the company's April 7, 2016 resolution with SEC, in which it agreed to pay a $9 million penalty and retain an independent compliance consultant, based on the same conduct. At the time, it appeared from the lack of a parallel resolution that DOJ had declined prosecution. Although not unprecedented, the lack of simultaneous resolutions is unusual.

8. Former Executives of New York-Based Hedge Fund Sued for Civil FCPA Violations.

On January 26, 2017, SEC announced that it had sued two former executives of Och-Ziff Capital Management Group LLC ("Och-Ziff") in connection with allegations that they caused bribes to be paid by Och-Ziff and its subsidiary, Oz Management LP (the "subsidiary"), to officials in several African countries. In addition to four claims related to alleged violations of the FCPA's anti-bribery and accounting provisions, the complaint alleges claims based on violations of the Investment Advisers Act (the "Act") and aiding and abetting the subsidiary's violations of the Act. In September 2016, DOJ and SEC announced corporate resolutions with Och-Ziff and the subsidiary that involved a combined monetary penalty of $412 million, as well as SEC charges against the parent company's CEO and CFO. In December 2016, a Gabon national pleaded guilty to a one-count information charging him with conspiring to violate the FCPA by bribing officials in three African nations in order to obtain mining rights for a joint venture related to Och-Ziff.

9. Four Individuals Face FCPA Charges in Connection with Vietnam Bribery Scheme.

On January 10, 2017, DOJ announced charges against four individuals, including the brother and nephew of former UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, in the Southern District of New York for allegedly conspiring to bribe a foreign official in connection with a deal to sell Vietnam's tallest skyscraper. According to prosecutors, the brother, Ban Ki-sang, a senior executive at the company that owned the 72-story building, and nephew, Joo Hyun (Dennis) Bahn, a broker at a Manhattan real estate firm, plotted to bribe an unnamed foreign official of an unspecified Middle Eastern country. An agent for the official, Malcolm Harris, allegedly agreed to receive bribes totaling $2.5 million on behalf of the official in exchange for the country's sovereign wealth fund purchasing the building for $800 million. Ban and Bahn, with the help of a fourth man, San Woo—charged separately—allegedly made an initial payment of $500,000 to Mr. Harris; however, Mr. Harris allegedly kept the money for himself, never passing it on to the foreign official. As a consequence, the real estate deal fell apart, at which point Mr. Bahn allegedly forged fake documents to cover up the scheme. The father and son each face one count of conspiracy to violate the FCPA, three counts of violating the FCPA, one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, and one count of money laundering. Bahn and Woo were arrested in New Jersey and JFK Airport, respectively, on January 10, 2017.

10. Update on Criminal FCPA Cases.

  • Two More Guilty Pleas in Venezuela Oil Case. On January 10, 2017, DOJ announced that two U.S. energy company executives pleaded guilty to FCPA charges in connection with payments to officials at Venezuela's state oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, S.A. (PDVSA). Juan José Hernandez Comerma, the former general manager of a Florida-based energy company, pleaded guilty in the Southern District of Texas to one count of conspiring to violate the FCPA and one count of violating the FCPA. He admitted to conspiring with two other U.S. executives—Abraham Jose Shiera Bastidas and Roberto Enrique Rincon Fernandez—to pay bribes to PDVSA purchasing analysts in the form of entertainment, travel, and cash payments from 2008 to 2012. Shiera and Rincon were arrested in December 2015; Shiera pleaded guilty in March 2016 and Rincon pleaded guilty in June 2016. Charles Quintard Beech III of Katy, Texas, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to violate the FCPA. Beech admitted to making payments to multiple PDVSA officials in 2011 and 2012, in exchange for putting his company on PDVSA bidding panels and receiving payments for previously awarded contracts. These mark the seventh and eighth guilty pleas in the long-running investigation, which remains ongoing.
  • Mexican Official Sentenced to 24 Months in Aircraft Conspiracy. In our December 2016 Top Ten, we reported that six individuals—four Texas businessmen and two Mexican officials—had pleaded guilty in the Southern District of Texas for their involvement in a scheme to bribe Mexican officials in order to secure aircraft maintenance and repair contracts with Mexican government-owned and -controlled entities. On January 12, 2017, one of the Mexican officials, Ernesto Hernandez-Montemayor, was sentenced to 24 months in prison for his role in the scheme. Montemayor had pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering. As part of his guilty plea, he admitted that, while employed by a Mexican state government, he received bribes from the Texas businessmen in exchange for assisting them with winning contracts from his employer, and that he conspired with the four businessmen to launder the proceeds.

Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved

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
James M. Koukios
Amanda Aikman
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must 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