February 3, 2013
Questions and Cases, Part 4, Chapter 17
1. How important is the role of the U.S. Government Agency in this transaction in relation to the DOJ’s decision? I believe the role of the U.S. Government Agency in the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Review Opinion Procedure Release 10-01, may be somewhat critical. In the case assignment, the facts and circumstances, as represented by the Requestor are legal and the Department’s conclusion to not taken any enforcement action with respect to the proposed service contract is a valid one. Although the Requestor is contractually bound to hire and compensate the individual as directed by the U.S. Government Agency. The Requestor did not play any role in selecting the individual, who was appointed by the Foreign Country based on the individual’s qualifications. The individual being hired as a Foreign Officer does not relate to the Facility and the services that the individual will provide as Facility Director are separate and apart from those performed as a Foreign Officer – the individual is being hired pursuant to an agreement between the U.S. Government Agency and the Foreign Country. The DOJ further explains its determination not to take action under the specific facts provided by the Requestor and should. In declining to take enforcement action, the Department considered the steps that the Requestor and the Foreign County have taken here to comply with the FCPA and other anti-bribery laws. 3. Does the amount of money paid to the foreign official have any official bearing on this decision? Unofficial? Facilitating or expediting payments should only be made if necessary to protect human health or safety. Any facilitating or expediting payment made to protect human health or safety must be accurately and fairly recorded in the Company’s books and should be reported to the Employee & Executive Protection Manager and the Law Organization as...