Follow Us
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In recent years, we have seen the Department of Justice (DOJ) expand its international focus, as it looks to punish foreign nationals, often for conduct that occurred almost entirely outside of the territorial borders of the United States, such as in the Libor and FX benchmark cases. See, United States v. Allen, 864 F.3d 63, 90 (2d Cir. 2018) (reversing conviction where compelled testimony in the United Kingdom was used against the defendants, both UK nationals, who were “hale[d] … into the courts of the United States to fend for their liberty”); United States v. Hayes, 118 F. Supp. 3d 620, 628-29 (S.D.N.Y. 2015) (prosecution of Swiss and UK nationals in U.S. courts where crime involved U.S. wire communications).
*May exclude premium content
The Updated FCPA Resource Guide
By Jacqueline C. Wolff
Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed, Something Blue
this second edition contains some new “hypotheticals” — facts of actual cases the DOJ finds important enough to focus on — and, in keeping true to its name, has included additional resources and links for chief compliance officers looking to design and audit their companies’ anticorruption compliance programs.
FIFA Decision Confirms Long Arm of Honest Services Fraud
By Robert J. Anello and Richard F. Albert
United States v. Napout
The U.S. government’s lead role in the prosecution of corruption within the Zurich-based FIFA may be a paradigmatic example of U.S. law enforcement acting as the world’s policeman. If corruption is based on foreign executives violating their duties of loyalty to foreign private entities, how does that translate into a violation of U.S. criminal law? Does it matter that the conduct in which the foreign executive engaged — commercial bribery — may not be illegal under the law of the executive’s home country?
Is an ‘Official Act’ An Element of Public and Private Corruption?
By Elkan Abramowitz and Jonathan S. Sack
This article discusses cases that have begun to address whether “official act” is an element in a private honest services fraud prosecution.
Lessons from the Insider Trading Prohibition Act After Its Likely Demise In the Senate
By Telemachus P. Kasulis
For a moment there, it really looked like it was going to happen. After a long and winding road, insider trading reform had reached the floor of the House of Representatives for a vote. The Insider Trading Prohibition Act (ITPA) had support on both sides of the aisle and on Dec. 5, 2019, the House voted to pass the ITPA. Then the bill went to the Senate and vanished. We should take this opportunity to learn what lessons we can from the successes and failures of the ITPA as a bill with an eye toward fashioning the best possible legislation next time — whenever that may be.
Copyright © ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
