Fifth Circuit’s Nullification Of Dismissal In Rafoi And Murta Reaffirms The Importance Of Preparing For FCPA Trials
A guest post from Andrew Feldman (The Feldman Firm PLLC which represents foreign nationals in FCPA cases and investigations with a focus on South America and Spain and recently represented Venezuelan nationals in an FCPA trial and is lead counsel in FCPA cases involving South American nationals including in Peru and Ecuador.).
Venezuela continues to be an attractive target for federal prosecutors investigating bribery and corruption. And, most, if not all, defendants in Venezuela FCPA cases have plead guilty opting against a trial. Months ago though, in a series of surprising opinions (here and here), a federal judge dismissed all counts in an indictment in a complex Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or “FCPA” and money laundering case involving Venezuela and Petroleos De Venezuela, SA (or PDVDSA). The defendants who benefitted from those dismissals were a Swiss national, Daisy Teresa Rafoi Bleuler, and a Swiss/Portuguese national, Paulo Jorge Da Costa Casquiero Murta.
Fifth Circuit Reinstates FCPA And Related Charges Against Rafoi-Bleuler And Murta Holding That – At This Stage Of The Proceedings – The Indictment Was Good Enough And Also Holds That The Term “Agent” Is Not Unconstitutionally Vague
As highlighted in this prior post, in 2019 Daisy Rafoi-Bleuler (a citizen of Switzerland and partner in a Swiss Wealth Management firm) and Paulo Caqueiro Murta (a citizen of Portugal and Switzerland and employee in a Swiss Management firm) were criminally charged with Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related offenses for allegedly directing bribes to various individuals at PDVSA (Venezuela’s state-owned and state-controlled energy company).
As highlighted in this post, in late October 2020 Rafoi-Bleuler filed a motion to dismiss the criminal charges. In summary fashion, the motion argued: “The indictment of Ms. Rafoi-Bleuler, a citizen and resident of Switzerland, continues the worrisome trend by the Department of Justice to stretch the reach of the United States’ criminal statutes beyond Congress’ intent in an attempt to police the world. Despite having violated no laws in Switzerland and having no contact with the United States …, Ms. Rafoi-Bleuler finds herself hailed into a U.S. court in contravention of clear statutory language, legal precedent, and international norms. Courts have increasingly, and correctly, rejected such attempts by the government and this Court should continue as well …”.
Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier Is Just Plain Wrong
Compared to many other federal statutes, there has been little caselaw interpreting the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in its 45 years of existence.
Substantive opinions by appellate courts are even more rare.
Thus, it is often a big deal when there is an appellate court decision interpreting the FCPA. Even a dissenting opinion – even a policy statement in a dissenting opinion – is notable.
As highlighted in this post, recently the Second Circuit – once again – sided with FCPA defendant Lawrence Hoskins on an FCPA issue. Specifically, the court held “that the district court properly granted Hoskins’s motion for judgment of acquittal for violations of the FCPA because there was no agency or employee relationship between Hoskins and Alstom Power, Inc.”
Second Circuit – Once Again – Sides With Hoskins On FCPA Issue
To call U.S. v. Hoskins a long-drawn out Foreign Corrupt Practices Act enforcement action would be an understatement.
In 2013, the DOJ criminally charged Lawrence Hoskins (a United Kingdom national and former senior vice president for the Asia region for France-based Alstom) with conspiracy to violate the FCPA’s anti-bribery provisions among other charges. (See here for the prior post). The conduct at issue alleged occurred between 2002 and 2004.
Unlike certain of his co-defendants who pleaded guilty, Hoskins put the DOJ to its burden of proof and at the trial court level argued in a motion to dismiss that the FCPA charges should be dismissed “on the basis that [the indictment] charges a legally invalid theory that he could be criminally liable for conspiracy to violate the FCPA even if the evidence does not establish that he was subject to criminal liability as a principal, by being an “agent” of a “domestic concern.” (See here for the prior post).
Fourth Circuit Affirms Lambert Convictions
As highlighted in this prior post, in January 2018 the DOJ announced that Mark Lambert (pictured – a former co-president of Transport Logistics International) was criminally charged with Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and related violations for his alleged “role in a scheme to bribe an official at a subsidiary of Russia’s State Atomic Energy Corporation.” The enforcement action concerned the same core conduct at issue in the prior enforcement actions involving Vadim Mikerin (an alleged Russian “foreign official”) and Daren Condrey (See here and here for prior posts).
As highlighted in this prior post, in November 2019 a jury found Lambert guilty of four counts of violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), two counts of wire fraud, and one count of conspiracy to violate the FCPA and commit wire fraud. (The jury returned not guilty verdicts on three FCPA counts and one count of money laundering).