The Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act (CFPOA) is Canada’s version of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
This previous post highlighted how a customer of Ultra Electronic Foreign Technology (UEFTI – a company that provides technology and solutions that help law enforcement and border security agencies around the world prevent and solve crime) charged UEFTI with CFPOA offenses.
The customer was Canada’s Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
This prior post highlighted the recent acquittal of Damodar Arapakota (founder and former chief executive of Toronto-based Imex Systems) by a Canadian judge of a charge of bribery of a foreign public official under Canada’s Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act (CFPOA)
The actual decision by the Canadian judge (see here) makes for an interesting read in that the CFPOA (while not a carbon copy of the FCPA) does contain many of the same general elements.
While touching upon other CFPOA elements such as mens rea and the meaning of advantage or benefit under the CFPOA, the main reasons the judge found Arapakota not guilty was due to the lack of nexus between the advantage or benefit (travel expenses) given to the foreign official and the discretionary act performed by the foreign official as well as the judge’s conclusion that the discretionary act performed by the foreign official did not satisfy the CFPOA’s “obtain or retain an advantage in business” element.
The logic, reasoning and rationale of the decision are all FCPA relevant.
Restitution
As highlighted in this prior post, in connection with the May 2022 Glencore FCPA enforcement action, the majority owners of Crusader Health (Ian and Laureth Hagen) petitioned the court in the underlying enforcement action to file a restitution claim under the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) and the Crime Victims Act on the basis that the entity was a victim of Glencore’s conduct in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The court granted the petition.
As highlighted in this prior post, Glencore acknowledged “that Crusader—and by extension, the Hagens—was harmed by the offense to which Glencore has pled guilty, and it is prepared to pay restitution in the amount of any loss directly and proximately caused by that offense.” However, Glencore disputed the amount of restitution properly owed.
Recently, the court awarded Crusader restitution of approximately $29.7 million (an amount less than the approximate $48.4 – $50.3 million Crusader sought). See U.S. v. Glencore International 2023 WL 2242469.
Montreal, Canada based Ultra Electronics Forensic Technology provides technology and solutions that help law enforcement and border security agencies around the world prevent and solve crime.
One of the companies customers is Canada’s Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP).
Recently, the RCMP announced that Ultra Electronics Forensic Technology Inc. (UEFTI) and former four executives (Robert Andrew Walsh, Philip Timothy Heaney, René Bélanger, and Michael McLean) were each charged with bribery and fraud under the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act (CFPOA) and the Criminal Code in connection with an investigation by the RCMP into international corruption.
[To the best of my recollection, my first introduction to the word “potpourri” was in watching Jeopardy which I was very fond of as a teenager and young adult. Rest in peace Alex Trebek]
Lingo
Daniel Kahn (Acting Chief of the DOJ Fraud Section) was the guest on this recent episode of the Compliance Perspectives Podcast. During the podcast, Kahn talks about COVID’s impact on DOJ enforcement and certain recent enforcement actions such as Goldman Sachs and Beam.
In terms of the DOJ’s mid-2000 revision to its “Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs” policy document, Kahn stated that it certainly is by no means a “game changer.” Call me old-fashioned, but I want to hear the DOJ Fraud Section Chief talk about the law and legal requirements not lingo. Yet, the podcast dishes up plenty of lingo (tone at the top, conduct at the top, tone of upper and middle management, empowering compliance, walking the walk, direct line to the board, dotted line to the board, etc.).
