Once Again, Rebooting A Long-Standing FCPA Proposal, This Time In The Aftermath Of A Recent Disclosure By Avianca Holdings
Including the first time I proposed this concept in 2010, this is the 1oth time I have written this general post (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here for the previous versions). Until things change I will keep writing it which means I will probably keep writing this same general post long into the future.
The proposal is this: when a company voluntarily discloses an FCPA internal investigation to the DOJ and/or SEC and when one or both of the enforcement agencies do not bring an enforcement action, have the enforcement agency publicly state, in a thorough and transparent manner, the facts the company disclosed and why the enforcement agency did not bring an enforcement action based on those facts.
What The Heck?
In running FCPA Professor, I search for Foreign Corrupt Practices Act content every day, 7 days a week, 12 months a year, 9 years running. In doing this, I have favorite sources and like reading some content better than others.
Transcripts of calls between investment analysts and corporate executives are always interesting as the Q&A sessions tend to be spontaneous and unscripted.
As highlighted in this prior post, on August 15th, Panama based Avianca Holdings S.A. (a company with shares traded on the New York Stock Exchange) disclosed:
Friday Roundup
Trial delayed, “foreign official” brain teaser, and scrutiny alert. It’s all here in the Friday roundup.
Trial Delayed
Previous posts here and here have highlighted the long-drawn out FCPA prosecution of Lawrence Hoskins. As highlighted here, the trial scheduled to begin on September 3rd has been further delayed until October 16th.