Top Menu

It All Depends What The “B” Word Means


Often times, discussion of complex legal or public policy issues is clouded by simplistic rhetoric and narrative spinning.

Just don’t bribe. A zero tolerance for bribery.

Sounds good and to be sure in certain FCPA Act enforcement actions the simplistic rhetoric and narrative is actually true. For instance, Siemens had a “corporate culture in which bribery was tolerated and even rewarded at the highest levels of the company.” Odebrech/Braskem maintained a business unit that allegedly “served as little more than a bribe-paying department for the benefit of Odebrecht and Braskem.”

Yet in many other FCPA enforcement actions – and the FCPA compliance discussion generally – cliches like “just don’t bribe” and a “zero tolerance for bribery” are overly simplistic because it all depends on what the “b” word means.

Continue Reading

Court Refuses To Take The Bait On The Bribery Narrative


There are certain narratives in the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act space – while theoretically possible – are rarely, if ever, found in actual FCPA enforcement actions.

For instance, all probably recognize that a bribe to foreign official to obtain a contract to build a bridge could – theoretically – result in the contract being awarded to a company that uses sub-standard steel causing the bridge to collapse and thus causing human injuries and/or death.

Likewise, all probably recognize that a bribe to a foreign physician (who the DOJ and SEC may consider a “foreign official”) to implant a defective medical device or to prescribe a worthless drug could – theoretically – result in patient health and safety issues.

Continue Reading

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes