Nine out of 10 visitors to this blog (according to feedburner.com) view our posts through a reader such as Google Feedfetcher or an aggregator. That means most visitors normally don’t see comments (or the buttons and other information to the right).
In response to our prior post about how the DOJ and SEC count their FCPA actions, we’ve received some helpful comments that we want to share with everyone. Here’s what we’ve heard so far:
Anonymous said…
Still doesn’t really answer varying scenarios:
(1) If the DOJ indicts someone who six months later enters a plea agreement, is that two enforcement actions?
(2) What if the DOJ indicts someone one year and that person enters a plea agreement a year later? Does that count as an enforcement action each year?
(3) What if the DOJ charges a subsidiary and enters a DPA or NPA with the parent (ala Baker Hughes last year), does that count as two enforcement actions?
October 13, 2008 10:01 PM
The FCPA Blog said…
Yup, there are some unanswered questions. We’ll post any further responses to clear up the mysteries.
October 13, 2008 2:15 AM
bc said…
The SEC counts enforcement actions on a fiscal year ending Sept. 30.
October 13, 2008 8:17 AM
Miguel V said…
Not sure how they count it internally, but thus far I’ve got about 6 different incidents from Jan 1, 2008 from the SEC’s lit releases. This is not counting the IXTC case that wrapped up this year after it had dragged on seemingly forever.
October 14, 2008 3:38 PM
Miguel V said…
Should also add I’m counting 4-5 for the DOJ since Jan 1 depending how you want to count it.
October 14, 2008 4:15 PM
Marc said…
Not sure how you figure Miguel. If you include settlements, pleas and unresolved indictments, on the DOJ side you appear to have 15 enforcement actions so far this year. If you don’t include indictments, you have 8.
6 Corporate Settlements
• Willbros Group (May)
• AGA Medical Corp.(May)
• AB Volvo (Mar.)
• Flowserve Corp. (Feb.)
• Faro Technologies (Jun.)
• WABTEC (Feb.)2 Individual Pleas
• Jack Stanley (Sep.)
• Martin Self (May7 Indictments
• Gerald Green (Superceding) (Oct.); (Initial) (Jan.)
• Patricia Green (Superceding) (Oct.); (Initial) (Jan.)
• Shu Quan Sheng (Physicist) (Sep.)
• Nam Nguyen (Nexus Tech) (Sep.)
• Kim Nguyen (Nexus Tech) (Sep.)
• An Nguyen (Nexus Tech) (Sep.)
• Joseph Lukas (Nexus Tech) (Sep.)On the SEC side, you appear to have 13 enforcement actions.
6 Corporate Settlements/Orders
• Con-Way Inc.(August)
• Faro Technologies (Jun.)
• Willbros Group (May)
• AB Volvo (Mar.)
• Flowserve Corp. (Feb.)
• WABTEC (Feb.)7 Individual Settlements/Orders
• Jack Stanley (Sep.)
• Jason Steph (May)
• Gerald Jansen (May)
• Lloyd Biggers (May)
• Steven J. Ott (April)
• Roger M. Young (April)
• Yaw Osei Amoako (April)October 14, 2008 7:12 PM
.
3 Comments
At a recent conference (SIFMA FCPA Seminar), Steve Tyrrell (Chief of Fraud Section at DOJ) said there had been 10 DOJ enforcement actions so far “in 2008” and Frederic Firestone (Associate Director, SEC Enforcement Division) said there had been 19 SEC actions so far this year. Not sure how these numbers were derived…
As I said in the other post, the DOJ numbers make sense if they only purport to tally actions up until September 22nd (when the Nexus employees were indicted, followed by Shu on the 24th).
The SEC numbers also make sense when you consider that the SEC counts enforcement actions on a fiscal year ending Sept. 30. In addition to this year’s 13 SEC actions (through September 30), there were 6 actions from October to December last year (York, Ingersoll Rand, Chevron, Lucent, Akzo Nobel, and Robert Phillip).
I still am unclear, however, on how actions should be counted under the circumstances in the first comment (I’m anonymous above).
Hey all,
I am currently conducing research on Anti Bribery efforts and the roles that NGOs and Multilaterals have played as actors.
Specifically I am looking for specific instances where NGOs and multilaterals have become players in anti bribery cases or any other extrajudicial proceedings. Research included thus far has included cases by the US Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission and a review a case that have occurred in EU member states.
Because of the ubiquitous nature of, as well as the varieties of NGOs (and multilaterals), they can become actors in the commission of corruption and bribery. These commissions can be either willful, unintended, and/or by coercion.
The purpose of this research is to determine the array of legal services available; gaps in the service delivery; and how the tools of organization development can enhance said services (particularly in the areas of culture and leadership).
Additionally I also hope to determine if NGOs/multilaterals can be brought together with private sector initiatives and players in this area to mutual benefit.
Thank you in advance for this and any help provided would be greatly appreciated.
Rich
Comments are closed for this article!