Every so often it is interesting to go back into the archives and this post rewinds ten years to Spring 2012.
Enjoy the trip down FCPA memory lane.
As highlighted here, Biomet resolved parallel DOJ and SEC enforcement actions for approximately $23 million. The enforcement action was part of an apparent sweep of the medical devices industry and was based on the enforcement theory that certain health care providers in Argentina, Brazil and China were “foreign officials.”
As highlighted here, BizJet International Sales and Support Inc. agreed to pay an $11.8 million criminal penalty “for bribing government officials in Latin America to secure contracts to perform aircraft maintenance, repair and overhaul services for government agencies.” The enforcement action involved a criminal information against BizJet resolved through a deferred prosecution agreement and the DOJ release stated that BizJet’s “indirect parent company, Lufthansa Technik AG” also “entered into an agreement [a non-prosecution agreement] with the DOJ in connection with the unlawful payments by BizJet and its directors, officers, employees and agents.”
As highlighted here, Garth Peterson (a former managing director for Morgan Stanley’s real estate business in China) pleaded guilty to a one count criminal information for “conspiring to evade internal accounting controls that Morgan Stanley was required to maintain under the FCPA.” As to Morgan Stanley, the DOJ release stated: “After considering all the available facts and circumstances, including that Morgan Stanley constructed and maintained a system of internal controls, which provided reasonable assurances that its employees were not bribing government officials, the Department of Justice declined to bring any enforcement action against Morgan Stanley related to Peterson’s conduct. The company voluntarily disclosed this matter and has cooperated throughout the department’s investigation.” Morgan Stanley’s so-called “declination” generated an avalanche of FCPA Inc. material and many seemed to “drink the DOJ’s Kool-Aid” without closely examining the facts. (See here and here).
One of the biggest myths in the FCPA’s modern era is that Walmart’s FCPA scrutiny began with the New York Times 2012 article (see here). This simply isn’t true as Walmart disclosed FCPA scrutiny months before in 2011. Nevertheless the Spring 2012 article – titled “Vast Mexico Bribery Case Hushed Up by Wal-Mart After Top-Level Struggle” – certainly raised the profile of Walmart’s FCPA scrutiny and it became likely the most intense instance of scrutiny in FCPA history. As highlighted here, in summer 2019, after an unconscionable 7.5 years of scrutiny Walmart resolved a rather underwhelming FCPA enforcement.
