How Other Countries Help and Hinder DOJ in Fighting Global White-Collar Crime
In remarks prepared for delivery at the American Bar Association's Third Global White Collar Crime Institute conference in Prague, Matthew Miner noted that the $296 million Technip resolution was coordinated with authorities in Brazil and $214 million of the U.S. criminal penalty was credited to that country.
June 27, 2019 at 05:14 PM
4 minute read
A U.S. Justice Department official Thursday stressed international collaboration in fighting white-collar crime and offered new details on this week's foreign bribery case against TechnipFMC.
In remarks prepared for delivery at the American Bar Association's Third Global White Collar Crime Institute conference in Prague, Matthew Miner noted that the $296 million Technip resolution was coordinated with authorities in Brazil and $214 million of the U.S. criminal penalty was credited to that country.
“Large international investigations like the one against Technip require more than just the resources of the Department of Justice, acting alone,” said Miner, DOJ's deputy assistant attorney general.
Besides Brazil, he said, “The governments of the United Kingdom, Monaco, Italy, Australia, France and Switzerland provided significant assistance to further the investigation. The coordinated law enforcement effort in the Technip investigation is far from an outlier.”
DOJ's “anti-piling on” policy tries to ensure that companies are not over-penalized, he added, as in crediting Technip for the amount it paid to settle its Brazil case for the same misconduct.
Houston attorney Ryan McConnell, of the R. McConnell Group, said, of the anti-piling on policy, “Miner is a thoughtful lawyer with significant private sector experience, and it shows. There is nothing worse for a general counsel than paying millions of dollars to U.S. regulators to resolve an investigation, believing the matter to be over and fairly resolved, to then have another foreign or state regulator that was not part of the original investigation use the admissions from the original settlement to launch another prosecution seeking millions more.”
In other key statements, Miner said:
- DOJ's policies are not just for domestic companies. “Last year we declined prosecution of Guralp Systems Limited, not only because of the company's voluntary disclosure, remediation and cooperation, but also because Guralp, a U.K. company with its principal place of business in the U.K., was the subject of an ongoing parallel investigation by the U.K.'s Serious Fraud Office for violations of law relating to the same conduct.”
- In addition, DOJ's recently revised corporate compliance guidance will be applied not just to U.S. companies, “but also to companies globally—and it recognizes the range of compliance challenges confronted by companies across industries, risk profiles, and the globe.”
- The work of prosecutors is being increasingly impacted by digital evidence. “Virtually every criminal scheme we investigate requires access to electronic evidence, such as the contents of emails and instant messages, and subscriber information.”
But Miner said the ability to investigate and prosecute international criminal schemes is often affected when “global companies and their subsidiaries that hold key evidence are often subject to more than one country's laws. Further complicating matters, data privacy and other restrictions are an evolving area, whether it relates to the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or state secret laws in countries like China.”
He explained that companies and their general counsel must understand “that when we request data that the company claims it is precluded from providing to us, the company bears the burden of establishing the prohibition.” If a company determines that it is unable to provide information, “we will expect a detailed explanation as to why,” Miner said.
McConnell, a former federal prosecutor, said some countries have blocking statutes, for example, that preclude compliance with certain U.S. sanctions laws, or have privacy laws that restrict data movement out of the country.
“You have some outside counsel advising companies on the other side of a DOJ investigation that try to figure out how to work within the laws to cooperate with DOJ,” he said, “and there are others that just throw their hands up in the air. Miner and the DOJ know the difference.”
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAfter Solving Problems for Presidents, Ron Klain Now Applying Legal Prowess to Helping Airbnb Overturn NYC Ban
7 minute readNLRB Blisters Skilled Care Home Chain That Terminated Nursing Assistant Who Complained About Wages
6 minute read'Erroneous Assumption'?: Apple Challenges DOJ Antitrust Remedy in Google Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1‘Facebook’s Descent Into Toxic Masculinity’ Prompts Stanford Professor to Drop Meta as Client
- 2Pa. Superior Court: Sorority's Interview Notes Not Shielded From Discovery in Lawsuit Over Student's Death
- 3Kraken’s Chief Legal Officer Exits, Eyes Role in Trump Administration
- 4DOT Nominee Duffy Pledges Safety, Faster Infrastructure Spending in Confirmation Hearing
- 5'Younger and Invigorated Bench': Biden's Legacy in New Jersey Federal Court
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250