Top Menu

Up North


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).

Recently, the Public Prosecution Service of Canada announced:

“The Superior Court of Quebec published the details of the remediation agreement between the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC) and Ultra Electronics Forensic Technology Inc. (UEFTI), which it approved earlier this year.

UEFTI faces two counts of bribing officials of the Republic of the Philippines, contrary to s. 3 of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, and one count of defrauding the Filipino government, contrary to s. 380 of the Criminal Code, from 2006 to 2018. The objective of the scheme was to secure the procurement of a ballistic identification system to the Philippine National Police. The prosecution against UEFTI is stayed and the charges will be withdrawn when the company has fulfilled its obligations under the agreement.

This is the first remediation agreement that PPSC has conducted and the second one pursued since Part XXII.1 of the Criminal Code came into force in 2018.

This four-year agreement includes the following conditions:

  • A penalty of $6,593,178; a surcharge of $659,318; and forfeiture of $3,296,589 for the advantage obtained from the wrongful conduct;
  • UEFTI must cooperate with any investigation or prosecution related to the offences;
  • UEFTI must report to the PPSC on the implementation of the agreement; and
  • UEFTI must abide by the terms of an anti-bribery and corruption program under the supervision of an external auditor, retained at UEFTI’s expense.

In reaching its decision, the court was satisfied that the agreement is in the public interest and that its terms are fair, reasonable and proportionate. The court anticipates that approving this agreement will encourage corporations to voluntarily disclose wrongdoing.

Known more widely as “Deferred Prosecution Agreements” in other jurisdictions, remediation agreements can serve as an alternative to prosecution in appropriate cases. They can also hold corporations accountable while mitigating the risk of future offences and harm to third parties, such as employees, investors and victims.”

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes