Tuesday, February 28, 2023
Sunday, February 26, 2023
US ATTORNEY ANNOUNCES NATIONAL PROGRAM GIVING CORPORATIONS ENGAGED IN CRIMINAL ACTIVITY BENEFITS FOR VOLUNTARY SELF-DISCLOSURE
Tampa, Florida - United States Attorney Roger B. Handberg announced that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Florida has implemented the new United States Attorney’s Offices’ Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy released earlier this week. The policy, which is effective immediately, details the circumstances under which a company will be considered to have made a voluntary self-disclosure (VSD) of misconduct to a United States Attorney’s Office (USAO-MDFL), and provides transparency and predictability to companies and the defense bar concerning the concrete benefits and potential outcomes in cases where companies voluntarily self-disclose misconduct, fully cooperate and timely and appropriately remediate.
The goal of the policy is to standardize how VSDs are defined and credited by USAOs nationwide, and to incentivize companies to maintain effective compliance programs capable of identifying misconduct, to expeditiously and voluntarily disclose and remediate misconduct, and to cooperate fully with the government in corporate criminal investigations. The policy was developed pursuant to the Deputy Attorney General’s September 15, 2022 memorandum, “Further Revisions to Corporate Criminal Enforcement Policies Following Discussions with Corporate Crime Advisory Group” (Monaco Memo), which directed each Department of Justice (DOJ) component that prosecutes corporate crime to review its policies on corporate voluntary self-disclosure and, if there was no formal written policy to incentivize self-disclosure, draft and publicly share such a policy.
“Transparency and accountability are integral to establish public and private trust,” said U.S. Attorney Handberg. “The new Voluntary Self-Disclosure Policy is an important step in encouraging corporate governance. This policy incentivizes corporations to do the right thing by reporting wrongdoing before detected by regulators and law enforcement. We hope that it will have a transformative effect in promoting positive, corporate practices within our district and nationwide.”
Under the new VSD policy, a company is considered to have made a VSD if it becomes aware of misconduct by employees or agents before that misconduct is publicly reported or otherwise known to the DOJ, and discloses all relevant facts known to the company about the misconduct to a USAO in a timely fashion prior to an imminent threat of disclosure or government investigation. A company that voluntarily self-discloses as defined in the policy and fully meets the other requirements of the policy, by—in the absence of any aggravating factor—fully cooperating and timely and appropriately remediating the criminal conduct (including agreeing to pay all disgorgement, forfeiture, and restitution resulting from the misconduct), will receive significant benefits, including that the USAO will not seek a guilty plea; may choose not to impose any criminal penalty, and in any event will not impose a criminal penalty that is greater than 50% below the low end of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (USSG) fine range; and will not seek the imposition of an independent compliance monitor if the company demonstrates that it has implemented and tested an effective compliance program.
The policy identifies three aggravating factors that may warrant a USAO seeking a guilty plea even if the other requirements of the VSD policy are met: (1) if the misconduct poses a grave threat to national security, public health, or the environment; (2) if the misconduct is deeply pervasive throughout the company; or (3) if the misconduct involved current executive management of the company. The presence of an aggravating factor does not necessarily mean that a guilty plea will be required; instead, the USAO will assess the relevant facts and circumstances to determine the appropriate resolution. If a guilty plea is ultimately required, the company will still receive the other benefits under the VSD policy, including that the USAO will recommend a criminal penalty of at least a 50% and up to a 75% reduction off the low end of the USSG fine range, and that the USAO will not require the appointment of a monitor if the company has implemented and tested an effective compliance program.
In cases where a company is being jointly prosecuted by a USAO and another DOJ component, or where the misconduct reported by the company falls within the scope of conduct covered by VSD policies administered by other DOJ components, the USAO will coordinate with, or, if necessary, obtain approval from, the DOJ component responsible for the VSD policy specific to the reported misconduct when considering a potential resolution. Consistent with relevant provisions of the Justice Manual and as allowable under alternate VSD policies, the USAO may choose to apply any provision of an alternate VSD policy in addition to, or in place of, any provision of its policy.
The Attorney General’s Advisory Committee (AGAC), under the leadership of United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Damian Williams, requested that the White Collar Fraud Subcommittee of the AGAC, under the leadership of United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York Breon Peace, develop policies in response to the Deputy AG’s memo. The policy announced today was prepared by a Corporate Criminal Enforcement Policy Working Group comprised of U.S. Attorneys from geographically diverse districts, including U.S. Attorney Peace, as well as U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Jessica Aber, U.S. Attorney for the District of Connecticut Vanessa Avery, U.S. Attorney for the District of Hawaii Clare Connors, U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina Michael F. Easley, Jr., U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of California Stephanie Hinds, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Virginia Christopher Kavanaugh, and U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey Philip Sellinger. Assistant U.S. Attorney Amanda Riedel, White Collar Crimes Coordinator for the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, also participated in the development of the policy.
Saturday, February 25, 2023
Friday, February 24, 2023
COURT DECISION ANNULLING PRIVATISATION OF MALTA'S HOSPITALS, AMIDST MASSIVE CORRUPTION ALLEGATIONS, WITH FCPA VIOLATIONS, INCRIMINATING FORMER PM, RESULTS IN WIDESPREAD CALLS FOR INDICTMENTS
|Joseph Muscat, looking more and more tired and stressed|
A Maltese judge today annulled the contract privatising three hospitals, holding the the transaction was fraudulent, and ordering that they are to be returned to government ownership and control. The Court, in a 140-page ruling, in a case brought by a former Opposition party leader, voided the largest public contract in Maltese history, leading to immediate demands that a number of government leaders who arranged what amounted to a fraudulent deal be promptly indicted. Public outrage boiled over today outside the courtroom, seeking immediate redress against those deemed responsible.
Central to the decision was the involvement of former PM, Joseph Muscat, and two other senior government officials, Christian Cardona and Konrad Mizzi. We have previously discussed allegations of their receipt of substantial bribes, and Foreign Corrupt Practises Act (FCPA) violations of the American businessmen who supplied them. See "WHEN WILL THE UNITED STATES CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM TAKE DOWN JOSEPH MUSCAT AND THE MALTA MONEY LAUNDERING MACHINE", and our other articles, beginning in 2018. We were the first to discuss and analyze the issue, in depth, and we trust that Mr. Muscat starts believing what we are writing now.
Our sources advise that a US law enforcement agency, which has been investigating the allegations, has been awaiting the outcome of this case, before proceeding further towards a criminal prosecution. The current American policy of zero tolerance to FCPA violations tells us we probably won't have long to wait.