Deferred Prosecution Agreements (DPAs) have become a significant part of white-collar criminal practice. Pioneered in the United States, they are now authorized (with modifications) in the United Kingdom, France, Canada and elsewhere. DPAs have been accepted as a means of achieving corporate remediation and reform without causing the collateral harm of a guilty plea. This outlook is reflected in Department of Justice policy developed over many years, including recent policy statements and speeches.

But DPAs (and nonprosecution agreements, or NPAs) are not without controversy. These agreements have been attacked as too lenient, not forcing companies to be held accountable for illegal conduct. They are also seen as a way for prosecutors to appear tough on white-collar crime while not bringing charges against individuals.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]