Fórum Defesa Brasil

BAE Systems settles with UK SFO, US justice dept
Written by defenceWeb with Reuters
Saturday, 06 February 2010 08:29


An al-Yamamah Eurofighter in Royal Saudi Air Force livery

BAE Systems Plc, Europe's biggest military contractor, will pay around $450 million in fines in the United States and Britain, settling long-running corruption investigations on both sides of the Atlantic.

In the United States, BAE, the Pentagon's fifth largest supplier by sales, will plead guilty to one charge of conspiring to make false statements to the U.S. government. The company will also pay $400 million in fines, one of the largest penalties against a defense contractor and comparable to the $402 million KBR Inc agreed to pay in February 2009 in a Nigerian bribery case, Reuters reported.

BAE Systes also has a significant South African footprint in the armoured vehicle business and has in recent years delivered Saab Gripen D and BAE Systems Hawk Mk120 fighter aircraft to the country.

According to a criminal charge filed in the U.S. District Court in Washington, BAE had gains of more than $200 million on the business related to the false statements, including deals in Saudia Arabia.

BAE will also plead guilty in Britain to one charge of breach of duty in relation to records of payments made in Tanzania. It will pay 30 million pounds ($48 million), the largest penalty imposed by Britain's Serious Fraud Office.


SFO wraps up probe, US to continue

"While it's a substantial figure, it's less than the worse case scenario," said analyst Tina Cook at brokerage Charles Stanley, noting initial media reports had suggested a figure of up to 1 billion pounds from the SFO alone, later revised down to between 200 million and 300 million. A statement by the SFO said its decision ended its investigations into BAE's defence contracts.

U.S. Department of Justice officials, however, said their investigations were ongoing. They declined to elaborate.

BAE Chairman Dick Olver said in a statement: "The company very much regrets and accepts full responsibility for these past shortcomings. These settlements enable the company to deal finally with significant legacy issues."

“In 2000, the Company gave a commitment to the U.S. Government that it would establish and comply with defined U.S. regulatory requirements within a certain period and it subsequently failed to honour this commitment or to disclose its shortcomings,” Olver added in a statement received by defenceWeb.

The U.S. court filing outlined a number of BAE's dealings, including the sale of fighter aircraft and other defense material to Saudi Arabia and the lease by the Swedish government of Saab Gripen fighter aircraft to the Czech Republic and Hungary. Because the leased jets contained U.S.-controlled defence components, Sweden needed to secure an arms export license from the U.S. Department of State.

"BAE Systems did not subject these payments and benefits to the type of internal scrutiny and review that BAE Systems had represented it would subject them to" in previous undertakings to the U.S. government," the court document said.


Prince Bandar and Saudi Arabia

A previous investigation by the Serious Fraud Office into reports BAE paid about 1 billion pounds over a decade ago to Prince Bandar bin Sultan in connection with the Saudi al-Yamamah arms deal had been halted in 2006 by former Prime Minister Tony Blair after the probe angered Saudi Arabia.

The U.S. court filing alleged the company "provided substantial benefits" to a Saudi official "in a position of influence" and to the official's associates. But the filing did not identify the individual.

In connection with the Saudi fighter deals, BAE agreed to transfer 10 million pounds and more than $9 million to a bank account controlled by an intermediary, according to the complaint. BAE "was aware that there was a high probability that the intermediary would transfer part of these payments to the KSA official," the complaint states.

BAE's U.S. subsidiary, BAE Systems Inc, was not accused of wrongdoing by the Justice Department. As a result, it may escape suspension or debarment from doing business with the U.S. government. The company supplies products and services to the Defense Department, U.S. intelligence and Homeland Security. The U.S. accounts for more than half of BAE's sales.


Transgression in Tanzania

The settlement BAE reached with the SFO of Britain relates to the sale of an air traffic control system in Tanzania, a contract worth 30 million pounds, according to an SFO spokesman. Part of the 30 million pound penalty will be a fine, to be decided by a court, with the remainder as a charity payment.

“In connection with the sale of a radar system by the Company to Tanzania in 1999, the Company made commission payments to a marketing adviser and failed to accurately record such payments in its accounting records,” Olver said. “The Company failed to scrutinise these records adequately to ensure that they were reasonably accurate and permitted them to remain uncorrected.”

After the settlement was announced, the SFO said it had withdrawn a corruption charge it filed on January 29 against Count Alfons Mensdorff-Pouilly, a BAE agent involved with BAE contracts in Eastern and Central Europe.

In London, BAE shares closed up 1.6 percent, as the market welcomed news of the settlement.
In a conference call with reporters on Friday, BAE Systems Chairman Dick Olver said the activities addressed by the settlement were all legacy issues. "We are now seen as a company of good standing and a responsible company to do business," he added.

He noted that the settlement amounts were non-tax deductible and would be included in BAE's 2009 results.

Gavin Cunningham, head of corruption investigations at accountancy firm BDO Stoy Hayward, said the SFO penalty "sends out a powerful message to UK business that corruption is going to be investigated and prosecuted." Some lawyers have said the SFO wanted to show it had teeth by following the examples of Germany and the United States in dealing with international corruption. In late 2008, for example, German industrial conglomerate Siemens agreed to pay just over $1.3 billion to settle corruption probes.

SFO director Richard Alderman said in a statement: "I am very pleased with the global outcome achieved collaboratively with the DoJ. This is a first and it brings a pragmatic end to a long-running and wide-ranging investigation."

Boss escreveu:Ele acha que seriam "só" presos se fosse com o Stálin ?

orestespf escreveu:Talvez esteja sendo muito puritano, mas um tópico de título "Suborno, corrupção e similares", com a intenção de se postar assuntos que saíram na mídia et all, mas sem dar o direito de resposta aos acusados (não necessariamente culpados) é dose!!!

Toda vez que se reúne um grupo, não importa o local e a forma, para se apontar culpados, de forma tal que de um jeito ou de outro poderia lesar alguém (pessoa física e/ou jurídica), caracteriza conluio, e isto me preocupa e muito... Cabe a quem é de direito, analisar e julgar, no meu caso, apenas apontar preocupação (no máximo é o papel que me cabe), até porque sou leigo nestes assuntos.


Cordialmente,

Orestes

Anti-corruption drive has US companies sweating
Monday, 18 July 2011 15:36

US companies, already sweating under heightened enforcement of anti-corruption laws at home, are nervously reviewing their policies on how they wine and dine business contacts abroad in the wake of tough new regulations imposed in Britain.

The new law, which took effect July 1, bans all so-called facilitating payments and does not expressly allow entertainment of government officials and others.

The jury is still out on how rigorously authorities will choose to enforce the law. Companies in the defence, pharmaceuticals, energy and telecommunications sectors are seen as particularly vulnerable, Reuters reports.

At the same time, US companies are grappling with tighter rules at home too. New whistleblower rules approved by the US Securities and Exchange Commission have also spurred companies to scrutinize their existing compliance programs, according to legal experts in the United States and Washington.

"We have definitely seen an uptick in our business in the anti-corruption and anti-bribery area," said Ed Rubinoff, a Washington-based expert on export controls and foreign corruption with Akin Gump Strauss Hauer and Feld.

Just this week, US lawmakers urged federal officials to investigate whether News Corp broke the US law banning bribes to foreign officials.

Akin Gump has added lawyers to handle the extra work, and now has 16 attorneys working on regulatory compliance in the United States, three in London and more in Abu Dhabi, Geneva and Beijing, Rubinoff told Reuters.

Lawyers at other big-name firms report similar trends, noting that the British law and the new SEC rules offering incentives to whistleblowers have galvanized some US firms that had less-than-stellar compliance programs in the past.

Paul Huey-Burns, a partner with Bryan Cave, urged clients to review internal controls, rehearse how to respond to a possible whistleblower report, and establish an unequivocal "no retaliation" policy to avert problems.

Attorneys are reluctant to identify specific companies that are tightening their internal rules for fear of attracting unwanted attention from U.S. or international regulators, but say the issue has attracted a lot of attention by nearly all companies that do business overseas.

"There's a lot going on," said Sharie Brown, who chairs DLA Piper's anti-bribery, anti-corruption and compliance group.

FEAR-MONGERING

Legal experts say US companies are girding for the worst in Britain.

Senior British officials, however, are pushing back against what they call fear-mongering by compliance professionals and lawyers on this side of the Atlantic, and have told U.S. experts that they plan to focus on significant violations, not reasonable business entertainment for government officials.

Chastened by years of criticism from US officials, British authorities will likely be looking for some high-profile cases to demonstrate their commitment to increased enforcement, said Brown, a former U.S. federal prosecutor.

Initial cases would likely piggyback on probes already in the US Justice Department pipeline, and could involve firms in the Defence, pharmaceutical, energy and telecommunications sectors, given their frequent use of third-party intermediaries and dealings with state-owned enterprises abroad, she said.

The FBI last month told a meeting at SEC headquarters it was keeping a close eye on deals between global aerospace firms and state-owned airlines, possible violations involving the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Olympic Games in Brazil, and the reopening of South Sudan's oil industry.

OPTING OUT

Insurers also see opportunities in the compliance arena. Marsh, a unit of Marsh and McLennan Companies Inc and the world's biggest insurance broker, this week launched a new insurance policy that covers companies and individuals for bribery-related investigations that can result in "significant legal, accounting, auditing, and consulting costs."

The UK law differs from the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in several ways, casting a wider net for which foreign officials are covered, and imposing unlimited fines on companies that do business in Britain if they cannot prove they have adopted adequate measures to ban bribery.

U.S. companies are urging British authorities to provide more detailed guidance on how they will interpret the new law, said Justin Williams, a partner with Akin Gump in London.

Williams said the new law lets British authorities opt out of pursuing cases that could jeopardize the UK national interest, which means that despite the tough new law, Britain could still avert prosecutions in cases like the one involving BAE Systems Plc.

The Serious Fraud Office in 2006 halted an investigation into alleged bribes paid by BAE Systems in connection with a huge arms deal with Saudi Arabia amid fears that it would threaten UK national security. BAE later paid US$400 million (247 million pounds) to settle related charges raised by the United States.

"It's by no means certain that a case like that would be brought under the new regime," Williams said. "We're going to have to see how the enforcement works."

BAE Systems carefully reviewed the new UK law, and concluded policies and procedures put in place after the Saudi arms deal would exceed the new requirements, Brian Roehrkaesse, a US-based spokesman for the company, told Reuters.

Reuters

Hawks peck at arms deal … again
Written by defenceWeb
Monday, 01 August 2011 14:22



The police's Directorate for Priority Crime Investigations, commonly called the Hawks” has reportedly taken a first step towards re-opening its investigation into the multibillion-rand Strategic Defence Package.

The head of the directorate, Lieutenant General Anwar Dramat, wrote to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts (SCOPA) on Wednesday informing it of the Hawks' intention to speak to European investigators to establish whether or not criminal charges should be brought against any South Africans, the Sunday Times reported yesterday. The Hawks controversially dropped the probe into the arms deal in September last year, arguing that prospects of successful prosecutions were slim.

In a letter to SCOPA chairman Themba Godi, Dramat says the Hawks are following up on last month's admission by Swedish defence group SAAB that its former British partner, BAE Systems, paid R24 million in bribes to secure a South African contract for 26 JAS Gripen fighter jets. All told, BAE systems spent R1 billion on what it called "commissions" in the arms deal, the Sunday Times avers.

Dramat writes : "I have already instructed two officials ... to approach the relevant authorities in both Sweden (National Anti-Corruption Unit) and the UK (Serious Fraud Office). Subject to approval by these authorities, (we) will assess the available information with a view to determine whether there is information which points to crime/s in South Africa ... whether it could be converted into relevant evidence by means of formal mutual legal assistance processes. It is also important to determine from the mentioned authorities what their investigations have revealed and whether the information obtained by them can be shared with the (Hawks)." He could not predict how long the investigation might take.

Godi confirmed receiving Dramat's letter, saying: "It's a brave and correct decision ... unless justice is being done and is seen as being done on this matter, it's going to continue to cast a cold shadow over the political landscape of the country."

Democratic Alliance defence shadow David Maynier welcomed the development, saying: “The DA welcomes the fact that ... Dramat … has launched a preliminary investigation into new information on the arms deal which emerged in Sweden.

“In my view, the Hawks have effectively launched a preliminary investigation into the new information that has emerged in Sweden. This is a significant new development and gives some hope that a full-blown investigation may be launched into the alleged role played in arms deal corruption by Fana Hlongwane and his web of companies including Hlongwane Consulting (Pty) Ltd.

“However, it is important to maintain perspective. The Hawks have not reopened the investigation into the arms deal, as a whole. … The success of the preliminary investigation will depend on close cooperation between the Hawks and Sweden’s National Anti Corruption Unit as well as the Serious Fraud Office in the United Kingdom. We are therefore going to have to monitor the progress of the preliminary investigation and ensure that there is no interference in the cooperation between the Hawks and law enforcement authorities in Sweden and the United Kingdom, Maynier said.

Corruption probe takes in ThyssenKrupp subsidiary
Published: 31 Oct 11 09:16 CET



An investigation into corporate corruption allegations in Asia appears to have widened and now includes a subsidiary of German steel concern ThyssenKrupp.

The probe by German prosecutors was originally looking into engine-maker Tognum and alleged kickbacks and bribes in connection with a weapons deal.

But it now appears that ThyssenKrupp’s submarine-making subsidiary HDW transferred money to a South Korean businessman who is a focus of the original probe. The company allegedly then received a submarine contract worth €2.5 billion from South Korean authorities, according to a report in weekly news magazine Der Spiegel.

ThyssenKrupp said it was launching an internal review and also working with authorities. Auditors and attorneys will go to South Korea for an on-site investigation in November, the company said.

The investigation into Tognum has raised eyebrows because of the gravity of some of the allegations.

According to a 200-page report, a company board member with responsibility for Asia may have been involved in facilitating millions of euros in kickbacks and bribes in connection with the arms deal.

The report described raucous parties with South Korean defence officials at red-light district nightclubs.

HDW, which has been owned for several years by ThyssenKrupp, operates Germany’s largest shipyard in Kiel. It employs thousands of workers throughout Europe.

DPA/The Local/mdm