Top Menu

FCPA Flash Podcast – A Conversation With Philip Urofsky Regarding 2019 FCPA Developments

FCPA Flash

The FCPA Flash podcast provides in an audio format the same fresh, candid, and informed commentary about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related topics as readers have come to expect from written posts on FCPA Professor.

This FCPA Flash podcast episode is a conversation with Philip Urofsky (Shearman & Sterling and former DOJ FCPA prosecutor). Recently, the firm issued it always information “Recent Trends and Patterns in Enforcement of the FCPA” and during the podcast Urofsky talks about: (i) whether the government has continued to advance expansive FCPA enforcement theories; (ii) the government’s expectations surrounding cooperation including whether the government could be more specific; and (iii) new players in the anti-corruption enforcement world.

Continue Reading

The DOJ’s Latest Voluntary Disclosure Guidance Is Absurd

absurd

Yet again, see here for a prior post, the Department of Justice recently revised its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Corporate Enforcement Policy (CEP) – originally released in November 2017. (See here for the current version).

As highlighted below, while two of the three revisions make sense, the revision concerning voluntary disclosure is absurd.

Continue Reading

FCPA Flash Podcast – A Conversation With Former DOJ FCPA Prosecutor Samer Korkor On International Cooperation

Podcast Logo

The FCPA Flash podcast provides in an audio format the same fresh, candid, and informed commentary about the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related topics as readers have come to expect from written posts on FCPA Professor.

This FCPA Flash episode is a conversation with Samer Korkor who left the DOJ’s FCPA Unit in May 2019. Korkor is currently a law professor at the David Clarke School of Law at the University of District Columbia and his other professional experiences include: Counsel to the DOJ’s Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal Division, Counsel to the DOJ’s Deputy Assistant Attorney General on International Affairs, Special Assistant United States Attorney in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Washington D.C., and as an attorney in DOJ’s Office of International Affairs. During the podcast, Korkor discusses the framework for transnational cooperation and multi-jurisdictional resolutions – areas of significant importance to FCPA and other white collar investigations and prosecutions.  Korkor’s comments happen to be particularly relevant to recently initiated Congressional impeachment inquiries as Korkor explains how the DOJ typically reaches out to foreign governments for investigative assistance.

Continue Reading

Deputy Assistant Attorney General Matthew Miner On ….

miner

Recently Deputy Assistant Attorney General Matthew Miner delivered this speech at an American Bar Association event in Prague.

During the speech, Miner touched upon international cooperation; the DOJ’s so-called “no piling on” policy; the DOJ’s “Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs” guidance document; gathering evidence in foreign countries; voluntary disclosure, cooperation and so-called declinations; and enforcement actions against foreign companies.

Continue Reading

Is This A Reason Walmart Did Not Receive Full Cooperation Credit – If So It Is Distubring

846-05647896
© ClassicStock / Masterfile
Model Release: Yes
Property Release: No
1960s MAN THINKING HAND PENCIL ON CHIN WEARING EYEGLASSES SERIOUS EXPRESSION

In the recent Walmart enforcement action, the DOJ’s NPA states that the company received “full credit” for its cooperation with the DOJ “into conduct in Brazil, China, and India and partial cooperation credit for its investigation into conduct in Mexico.”

The NPA further states: “the Company received partial credit for the conduct in Mexico because, in the view of the DOJ, Walmart did not timely provide documents and information to the DOJ in response to certain requests and did not deconflict with the DOJ’s request to interview one witness before the Company interviewed that witness.”

It would appear that the DOJ’s decision was based, in least in part, on this June 2018 Fourth Circuit decision in which the court, interpreting an agreement that the DOJ drafted, ruled against the DOJ. If true, it is disturbing that the DOJ would penalize a company for making legal arguments that were upheld by an appellate court.

Continue Reading

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes