Betting the Corporation: Compliance or Defiance? Compliance Programs in the Context of Deferred and Non-Prosecution Agreements - Corporate Pre-Trial Agreement Update - 2008

Corporate Counsel Review, Forthcoming

25 Pages Posted: 23 Jan 2009 Last revised: 26 Jan 2009

Lawrence D. Finder

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Ryan D. McConnell

Haynes and Boone LLP

Scott L. Mitchell

OCEG; LoopLogic; Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO); EventDay; DoubleDrum Capital

Date Written: January 23, 2009

Abstract

In 2008, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) entered into sixteen corporate pre-trial agreements (collectively deferred prosecution agreements (DPA) and non-prosecution agreements (NPA). This was a sixty percent decline from the forty agreements we saw in 2007. This brings to one hundred and twelve the number of agreements we have found from 1993-2008.

Violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) remained the predominant subject matter addressed by corporate pre-trial agreements with seven of the sixteen agreements resolving FCPA violations. In 2007, roughly a third of the agreements involved FCPA violations. In addition, we saw the first corporate pre-trial agreements resolving immigration work-site enforcement investigations into corporate targets. There were three work-site related corporate pre-trial agreements in 2008.

In 2008, every agreement contained some sort of corporate compliance reform provision - continuing a trend we have seen over the last few years. This trend is the focus of this update. Aside from building on prior observations, this piece attempts to draw empirical observations about the types of compliance programs that come out of corporate pre-trial agreements. The authors recognize there is no one-size fits all template for corporate compliance programs. But by examining compliance programs in the context of DPAs and NPAs, the authors strive to provide a picture of what types of compliance measures are negotiated by the DOJ and corporate targets to resolve internal control and other business deficiencies that resulted in criminal wrongdoing. We hope that this will provide some guidance for attorneys and other professionals who deal with compliance issues.

Keywords: deferred prosecution agreement, compliance, non-prosecution agreement, filip, holder, mcnulty, thompson, Department of Justice, DOJ, ethics

Suggested Citation

Finder, Lawrence D. and McConnell, Ryan D. and Mitchell, Scott L., Betting the Corporation: Compliance or Defiance? Compliance Programs in the Context of Deferred and Non-Prosecution Agreements - Corporate Pre-Trial Agreement Update - 2008 (January 23, 2009). Corporate Counsel Review, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1332033

Lawrence D. Finder

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Ryan D. McConnell (Contact Author)

Haynes and Boone LLP ( email )

One Houston Center
1221 McKinney
Houston, TX
United States
713.547.2622 (Phone)

Scott L. Mitchell

OCEG ( email )

4144 N. 44th Street
Suite 6
Phoenix, AZ 85018
United States

HOME PAGE: http://www.oceg.org

LoopLogic ( email )

4144 N. 44th Street
Suite 6
Phoenix, AZ 85018
United States

Committee of Sponsoring Organizations (COSO) ( email )

United States

EventDay ( email )

4835 E. Cactus Rd Suite 225
Suite 212
Scottsdale, AZ 85254
United States

DoubleDrum Capital ( email )

4144 N. 44th Street
Suite 6
Phoenix, AZ 85018
United States

HOME PAGE: http://www.oceg.org

Paper statistics

Downloads
933
Rank
18,690
Abstract Views
3,855