Global Anti‐Corruption Regimes: Why Law Schools May Want to Take a Multi‐Jurisdiction Approach
23 Pages Posted: 25 Sep 2009
Date Written: September 25, 2009
The legal fight against bribery and corruption has evolved from the solitary effort of the United States with its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) to a global legal endeavor. Corporations are frequently engaged in transnational deals that require them to understand their obligations under a web of anti-corruption regulations with penalties ranging from fines in the tens of millions of dollars to life imprisonment. Although the market for legal services has changed to match client needs, the curriculum at most U.S. law schools has not. This paper explores the relationship between transnational business and legal services and legal education in the United States.
First, the article offers a comparative analysis of the main anti-corruption regimes, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, The Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, United Nations Convention Against Corruption, The Organization of American States Inter-American Convention Against Corruption, Council of Europe Criminal and Civil Law Conventions on Corruption and The African Union Convention on Preventing and Combating Corruption.
Second, this paper analyzes how the legal market in the United States has responded to the global regulatory environment and provides an empirical study of the what anti-corruption legal services the twenty-five largest U.S. law firms provide their clients.
Finally, the paper presents a rough outline of a possible curriculum change and suggests that U.S. law schools would be well-advised to allow interested students to pursue multi-jurisdictional specialization in certain regulatory practice areas.
Keywords: Legal education, Curriculum change, Anti-corruption regimes
JEL Classification: K10, K40
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation