Brazil Summit on Anti-Corruption

Every year, more and more cases of companies and individuals violating the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) in Latin America surface, exposing the unique anti-corruption compliance challenges faced by companies doing business in the region. The heavy reliance on third-parties, such as customs brokers and sales agents, the frequent presence of state-controlled entities in the business sector, ownership interests that Latin American governments have in certain sectors including oil, pharmaceutical, infrastructure, and telecommunications industries, and the general culture of hospitality, all increase exposure to FCPA liability. Recent cases including Universal Corp., Control Components, Nature’s Sunshine Products, Latin Node, Pride International, Hioki, Helmerich & Payne, Alcatel and Siemens  highlight the dire financial and reputational consequences of non-compliance with global anti-bribery regulations.

Companies doing business in Latin America, particularly in Brazil, must also be cognizant of local anti-corruption measures and their impact. Under the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business (“OECD Convention”) and the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption (“IA Convention”), signatories are required to criminalize the bribery of foreign public officials, and several countries in Latin America, including Brazil, are taking steps to enact legislation to implement this provision. When the proposed bill in Brazil is passed, it will dramatically change Brazil’s anti-corruption legal landscape and impact compliance priorities for both local and foreign companies.

With heightened international anti-bribery standards, growing cooperation between international government agencies, and enforcement of the FCPA at an all time high, the importance of ethics and compliance programs has never been greater. If your company is doing business in Latin America, you must have a robust anti-corruption compliance program in place and be prepared to act promptly and effectively to remedy any problems that do arise.

via Brazil Summit on Anti-Corruption.

FCPA Digest Reports Increased Prosecutions of Individuals, Emphasis on Industry Compliance — PRNewswire

“In some ways 2009 can be viewed as the calm before the FCPA storm,” says Philip Urofsky, a Washington-based partner at Shearman & Sterling and head of the firm's FCPA and Global Anti-Corruption Practice. “Unlike the prosecutions of Siemens and Halliburton/KBR in late 2008 and early 2009, which resulted in record-breaking penalties of $1.5 billion and $600 million, respectively, many of the corporate cases brought in 2009 involved smaller companies and smaller fines.”

“But,” he adds, “in recent weeks and months, BAE ($400 million), Technip ($400 million), Daimler ($200 million), Alcatel-Lucent ($200 million) and, most recently, ENI ($330 million) all announced that they had settled or were close to settling long-running FCPA investigations with the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission. And a number of other companies have announced that they will complete their negotiations with the DOJ and SEC in the near future.”

“These prosecutions suggest that the Obama Administration intends to continue to put the pressure on foreign companies and foreign governments to honor their commitments under the OECD Convention and, in the interim, to fill the gap left by lax foreign enforcement through aggressive use of U.S. jurisdiction,” Urofsky adds. In addition, he noted, senior DOJ and SEC officials have promised a robust program of enforcement, including proactive initiatives focusing on specific business sectors, particularly the pharmaceutical industry.

From a numbers standpoint, FCPA prosecutions of individuals went up dramatically in 2009 – from 16 in 2008 to 42 in 2009. Corporate matters were down – from 18 matters initiated in 2008 to just 13 in 2009.

“Over the years, since the law’s inception in 1977, FCPA prosecutions have increased pretty consistently, with 2007 being a watershed year with particularly high activity,” explains Danforth Newcomb, the New York-based founder of Shearman & Sterling’s FCPA practice. “While we're not at the 2007 activity levels in terms of the overall number of corporate prosecutions, companies shouldn’t be lulled into a false sense of security that the government is any less interested in or committed to combating anti-corruption. Indeed, the use of aggressive investigatory tactics such as an undercover ‘sting’ operation and simultaneous arrests and search warrants in the law enforcement supply case demonstrates that the government has both the will and the resources to use prosecutions to punish wrong-doers and to deter others from following suit.”

via FCPA Digest Reports Increased Prosecutions of Individuals, Emphasis on Industry Compliance — NEW YORK, March 29 /PRNewswire/ –.

Facilitation Payments: A business integrity officer’s perspective – Ethical Corporation

More than thirty years after the inception of the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977 FCPA, twelve years after the signing of the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development’s OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of 1997, and half a decade since the adoption of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption of 2004, one of the still grey areas in the anti-corruption debate is the topic of whether “facilitation payments” should be made.

Simply put, a facilitation payment is what is more colloquially referred to as a “grease” payment.

Some jurisdictions allow them, others forbid them and yet others don’t allow them but provide exceptions because of their intrinsically extortionate nature.

Indeed, the United Kingdom, still in the midst of debating the final form of its new anti-corruption law expected to be adopted in mid 2010, is yet to have settled the issue. On International Anti-Corruption Day, December 9, 2009, the OECD announced an expansion of the efforts of its 30 member countries and additional eight signatory nations with regard to its anti-corruption efforts.

via Facilitation Payments: A business integrity officer’s perspective – Ethical Corporation.