Tag Archives: Elizabeth Robertson

UK Steps Up Enforcement Efforts with New Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regime (Part II of II)

by Ryan D. Junck, Elizabeth Robertson, and Zahra Mashhood

This is Part II of a two-part post. This Part discusses practical ramifications of the UK’s new Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regulations. For Part I, discussing technical aspects of the regulations, click here.

The new Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regime is a further step by the UK on its path to forge its own post-Brexit sanctions policy. It mirrors the approach taken by its international partners, the US and Canada, both of which already have systems in place that impose sanctions on people and entities based on allegations of corruption. For example, under the new rules, the UK sanctioned current Guatemalan official Felipe Alejos Lorenzana on the same day the US did. Furthermore, a large number of the individuals on the UK’s list have already been sanctioned by the US.

Continue reading →

UK Steps Up Enforcement Efforts with New Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regime (Part I of II)

by Ryan D. Junck, Elizabeth Robertson, and Zahra Mashhood

This is Part I of a two-part post. This Part discusses the technical aspects of the UK’s new Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regulations. For Part II, discussing practical ramifications of the regulations, click here.

On 27 April 2021, the UK implemented its new Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regime, enhancing its existing Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime, which came into force in July 2020. The new Global Anti-Corruption Sanctions Regulations 2021 (the Regulations) enable the UK Foreign Secretary to impose asset freezes and travel bans on designated individuals and entities linked to certain corrupt activities, and criminalises the breach of those sanctions within the UK, as well as any breach by any UK individual or UK entity wherever located. That includes UK subsidiaries of foreign companies.

The purpose of the regime is to prevent and combat serious governmental corruption, by stopping those involved from entering and channelling money through the UK. The system is broadly similar to those in place in the US and Canada. The regime has been implemented under the Sanctions and Anti-Money Laundering Act 2018 (SAMLA), which established the legal framework for the UK to introduce new sanctions regimes post-Brexit.

Continue reading →

Comparing French and U.K. Guidance on Corporate Cooperation to U.S. Practices

by Keith D. Krakaur, Ryan D. Junck, Gary DiBianco, Elizabeth Robertson, Christopher Bolyai, Margot Sève, Vanessa K. McGoldrick, and Molly Brien

On June 27, 2019, the French Financial Prosecutor (“PNF”) and the French Anticorruption Agency (“AFA”) published joint guidelines regarding the legal framework governing French DPAs (“CJIPs”) that address the conditions necessary for companies to be considered for a CJIP, including expectations for cooperation during an investigation (“French CJIP Guidance”).[1] On August 6, 2019, the U.K. Serious Fraud Office (“SFO”) published Corporate Co-operation Guidance (“U.K. Co-operation Guidance”) as part of the SFO Operational Handbook, detailing the steps companies are expected to undertake to obtain cooperation credit.

Both sets of guidance demonstrate further alignment of those jurisdictions’ deferred prosecution agreement (“DPA”) regimes with long-standing practices in the U.S., albeit with some notable areas of divergence. Continue reading →