Webcast: FCPA Trends in the Emerging Markets of Asia, Russia, Latin America and Africa - 11th Annual Webcast - Gibson Dunn
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Webcast: FCPA Trends in the Emerging Markets of
Asia, Russia, Latin America and Africa
11th Annual Webcast
F. Joseph Warin
Kelly S. Austin
Joel M. Cohen
Benno Schwarz
Patrick F. Stokes
Oliver D. Welch
January 12, 2021
MCLE Certificate Information
MCLE Certificate Information
• Most participants should anticipate receiving their certificate of attendance in four weeks
following the webcast.
• All questions regarding MCLE Information should be directed to Victoria Chan at +1
650-849-5378 or vchan@gibsondunn.com.
2
Presenters
F. Joseph Warin Joel M. Cohen Kelly S. Austin
Partner Partner Partner
Washington, D.C. Office New York Office Hong Kong Office
Tel: +1.202.887.3609 Tel: +1.212.351.2664 Tel: +852.2214.3788
Fax: +1.202.467.0539 Fax: +1.212.351.5264 Fax: +852.2214.3710
FWarin@gibsondunn.com JCohen@gibsondunn.com KAustin@gibsondunn.com
Benno Schwarz Patrick F. Stokes Oliver D. Welch
Partner Partner Partner
Munich Office Washington, D.C. Office Hong Kong Office
Tel: +49.89.1893.3210 Tel: +1.202.955.8504 Tel: +852.2214.3716
Fax: +49.89.1893.3333 Fax: +1.202.467.0539 Fax: +852.2214.3710
BSchwarz@gibsondunn.com PStokes@gibsondunn.com OWelch@gibsondunn.com
3
Topics to Be Discussed
• An Overview of FCPA Enforcement
• Emerging Market Anti-Corruption Enforcement and Trends:
o China
o India
o Latin America
o Africa
o Russia
• Global Trends and Risk Mitigation Strategies
• Appendix: The FCPA
4
An Overview of FCPA Enforcement
5
FCPA Enforcement Actions Per Year (2009-2020)
Number of FCPA Enforcement Actions Per Year
50 48
DOJ Actions
45
SEC Actions
40
35
35 32
29
30
26 26
25
25 23
22
21 21
19 19
20 17 17
14
15 12
11 11
10 10 10
9
10 8
5
0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
6
Number of FCPA Enforcement Actions by
Country (1978 to Present*)
120
109
Business conduct in China remains the
largest source of FCPA actions in the
100
history of the statute.
80 75
64
60
51
49
47
39 39
40 35 35
31
23 24
21 22
20 17 18 18 18 18
15 15 15 15
12 12 13 13 13 13 14 14
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 11
7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 9 9
6 6 6 6 6 6
0
* Minimum six enforcement actions.
7
Enforcement of the FCPA: Criminal Penalties
Anti-Bribery Provisions
• Corporations: USD 2 million fine or twice the pecuniary gain or loss.
• Individuals: Up to 5 years’ imprisonment, and a USD 250,000 fine or twice the pecuniary gain or loss.
Accounting Provisions
• Corporations: Criminal penalties up to a USD 25 million fine or twice the pecuniary gain or loss.
• Individuals: Up to 20 years’ imprisonment, and a USD 5 million fine or twice the pecuniary gain or loss.
Total Value of Corporate FCPA Monetary Resolutions (2014 – 2020)
$3,000,000,000
$2,500,000,000 Highest ever
in the history
of the FCPA
$2,000,000,000
$1,500,000,000
$1,000,000,000
$500,000,000
$0
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
8
FCPA Top 10: Enforcement Actions – 2019 and
2020 Resolutions Top the Charts
No. Company Total Resolution DOJ Component SEC Component Date
1 Goldman Sachs* USD 1,663,088,000 USD 1,263,088,000 USD 400,000,000 10/22/2020
2 Ericsson USD 1,060,570,432 USD 520,650,432 USD 539,920,000 12/06/2019
3 Mobile TeleSystems USD 850,000,000 USD 750,000,000 USD 100,000,000 3/6/2019
4 Siemens AG** USD 800,000,000 USD 450,000,000 USD 350,000,000 12/15/2008
5 Alstom S.A. USD 772,290,000 USD 772,290,000 -- 12/22/2014
6 KBR/Halliburton USD 579,000,000 USD 402,000,000 USD 177,000,000 2/11/2009
7 Teva USD 519,000,000 USD 283,000,000 USD 236,000,000 12/22/2016
8 Telia*** USD 483,103,972 USD 274,603,972 USD 208,500,000 9/21/2017
9 Och-Ziff USD 412,000,000 USD 213,000,000 USD 199,000,000 9/29/2016
10 BAE Systems**** USD 400,000,000 USD 400,000,000 -- 2/4/2010
* The DOJ imposed a USD 2.315 billion criminal fine, USD 1.263 billion of which went to the DOJ, with the remaining amount paid to the SEC, and other enforcement authorities in the UK,
Singapore and Hong Kong. The SEC required Goldman Sachs to pay a USD 400 million civil penalty and disgorgement of USD 606.3 million, with the disgorgement amount paid to the
Government of Malaysia and 1MDB.
** Siemens’s U.S. FCPA resolutions were coordinated with a €395 million (USD 569 million) anti-corruption settlement with the Munich Public Prosecutor.
*** The combined amount of U.S., Dutch, and Swedish financial penalties is USD 965.6 million.
**** BAE pleaded guilty to non-FCPA conspiracy charges of making false statements and filing false export licenses, but the alleged false statements concerned the existence of the company’s
FCPA compliance program, and the publicly reported conduct concerned alleged corrupt payments to foreign officials.
9
Global Dimension of Enforcement Actions
In addition to record-setting monetary penalties in the U.S., several companies also have
paid significant fines to non-U.S. enforcers.
Company Total U.S. Resolution Non-U.S. Resolution
Goldman Sachs agreed to pay over USD 3 billion to U.S. government bodies and
Goldman Sachs USD 1,663,088,000 foreign authorities in countries including the United Kingdom, Singapore, Hong
Kong and Malaysia.
Siemens’s U.S. FCPA resolutions were coordinated with a €395 million (USD 569
Siemens AG USD 800,000,000
million) anti-corruption settlement with the Munich Public Prosecutor.
The total combined amount of United States, Dutch, and Swedish penalties was
Telia Company AB USD 483,000,000
USD 965.8 million.
Airbus’s total sanctions, paid to United States, United Kingdom, and French
Airbus SE USD 294,488,085
authorities, totaled around USD 4 billion.
While the DOJ assessed the full USD 585 million penalty against SocGen,
Société Générale S.A. USD 292,800,000 approximately half of it (USD 292.8 million) was paid to the French regulator,
Parquet National Financier and credited against the U.S. fine.
10Corruption Trends: Asia, Russia, Latin
America, and Africa
11China
12China: Market Characteristics
1.4 billion Estimated population of China
in 2020. Median age of 38.4.
USD 460 China’s annual foreign trade
surplus through November 2020.
billion
Percentage increase in China’s
21.1% exports from a year ago.
Estimated GDP growth in 2020, a
~2% 4.1% decrease from 2019.
China’s projected inflation for
1.9% 2021.
Foreign direct investment into
USD 103.26 China through September 2020,
billion a 2.5% increase from September
2019.
Sources: Worldometers, China Population 2020 (December 30, 2020) http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/china-population/;
Associated Press, China trade surplus hits record $75B as Nov exports soar (December 30, 2020) https://apnews.com/article/business-global-trade-
coronavirus-pandemic-china-united-states-
76b934a5c6729de4466fc6ba89b4dcb2#:~:text=China's%20global%20trade%20surplus%20for,gained%2033%25%20to%20%2414.6%20billion; 13
International Monetary Fund, People's Republic of China at a Glance, https://www.imf.org/en/Countries/CHN;
https://tradingeconomics.com/china/inflation-cpi; Trading Economics, China Exports (December 30, 2020)
https://tradingeconomics.com/china/exports; Asia Times, China’s foreign investment up in first nine months (December 30, 2020)
https://asiatimes.com/2020/11/chinas-foreign-investment-up-in-first-nine-months/.China: Corruption Landscape
China ranks 80th out of 198 countries in According to World Bank’s Global Governance
Transparency International’s latest Corruption Indicators, China improved from the 36th
Perceptions Index, a seven-spot increase from last percentile in 2008 to the 43rd percentile in 2019
year’s rankings. on “control of corruption.”
More than 1.5 million officials have been disciplined over the past eight years as part of President Xi
Jinping’s anti-corruption crackdown. Since January 1, 2020:
Number of officials disciplined by CCDI in China for violations of the “Eight
100,323 Rules” (including embezzlement, bribery, abuse of power, misappropriation,
dereliction of duty, and malpractice).
117,698 Number of cases investigated by CCDI in China for violations of the “Eight Rules.”
Sources: Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index 2019 (December 30, 2020)
https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2019/results/chn; Worldwide Governance Indicators Project (December 30, 2020) 14
https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/; China Anti-Corruption, http://www.cnzglz.com/?news/4109 (December 30,
2020) http://www.cnzglz.com/?news/4109.China: National Legislative Developments
Amendments to the PRC Criminal Law
In December 2020, China’s National People’s Congress passed amendments to the Criminal Law
of the People’s Republic of China. The amendments will become effective on March 1, 2021. Key
amendments include the following:
• The amendment to Article 164 raised the criminal penalty for private individuals (“non-state
functionaries”) convicted of commercial bribery involving very large sums to imprisonment for 10
years to life. This amendment places punishments for non-state functionaries on par with those for
government officials found guilty of similar crimes.
• Article 334.1 added a new criminal offense for illegally collecting human genetic resources (such as
human tissues and cells) or illegally transporting or mailing human genetic resources abroad. In
October 2020, China passed the Biosecurity Law, which lays out the requirements relating to the
collection and use of human genetic resources and the administrative penalties for breaching these
requirements.
• Article 142.1 codified the prohibition against fabricating records and statistics in connection with
drug registrations.
Source: National People’s Congress, 中华人民共和国刑法修正案(十一) (December 26, 2020)
http://npc.people.com.cn/n1/2020/1227/c14576-31980014.html. 15China: National Legislative Developments
Unreliable Entity List – China’s response to U.S. sanctions on Chinese companies
In September 2020, China’s Ministry of Commerce (“MOFCOM”)
created an “Unreliable Entity List” as a counterpoint to U.S. and
international sanctions against the PRC. Inclusion on the list comes with
a variety of consequences.
• Chinese authorities may add foreign entities to the list for: (1) “endangering national sovereignty, security
or development interests of China”; or (2) “suspending normal transactions with” or “applying
discriminatory measures against” a Chinese entity which “violates normal market transaction principles
and causes serious damage to the legitimate rights or interests” of the Chinese entity.
• The open-ended list of potential sanctions include prohibitions or restrictions on China-related imports or
exports, investment in China, entry into China, permit to work or stay in China, as well as fines and
“other necessary measures.” No entity has been added to the list to date.
In October 2020, the National People’s Congress passed the Export Control Law,
establishing China’s first comprehensive export control regime.
Key takeaway: Multinationals operating in China must now contend with a far-reaching domestic
sanctions regime. Monitor political developments closely and ensure your compliance program accounts
for PRC sanctions and trade control laws.
Sources: MOFCOM, Provisions on the Unreliable Entity List (September 19, 2020)
http://www.mofcom.gov.cn/article/b/fwzl/202009/20200903002593.shtml (in Chinese), 16
http://english.mofcom.gov.cn/article/policyrelease/questions/202009/20200903002580.shtml (the official English translation); Export
Control Law (October 17, 2020) http://www.npc.gov.cn/npc/c30834/202010/cf4e0455f6424a38b5aecf8001712c43.shtml (in Chinese),China: Local Legislative Developments
Shanghai’s Focus on Commercial Bribery and Compliance Programs
Shanghai Municipal People’s Congress amended its Anti-Unfair
Competition Regulations in October 2020, effective on January 1, 2021.
Key provisions for companies operating in Shanghai include:
• Accepting bribes (no monetary threshold) for commercial
Key Takeaways
advantage directly or indirectly is prohibited;
Multinational companies with operations
• Companies are “required” to strengthen internal controls in Shanghai should be aware of local
relating to anti-unfair competition, and “encouraged” to legislative developments, in additional to
national legislative developments. Local
establish anti-corruption compliance programs;
regulations, such as Shanghai’s Anti-
• In anti-corruption enforcement proceedings, the government Unfair Competition Regulations, may
impose additional regulatory
should assess whether the companies in question have an requirements on companies.
anti-corruption compliance program; and
******
• The government should publish guidelines with respect to
The regulations reflect a trend to hold
anti-unfair competition enforcement actions. companies accountable for the depth and
breadth of their compliance programs.
Sources: Shanghai Municipal People’s Congress, 上海市人民代表大会常务委员会公告第49号 (October 28,
2020) http://www.spcsc.sh.cn/n8347/n8467/u1ai222523.html. 17China: Domestic Enforcement Highlights
High-Risk Sectors
Local enforcement actions in 2020 highlight risks in the Chinese energy and finance sectors.
• In October, enforcement authorities announced a • In November, the former chairman of Hengfeng
corruption probe into Liu Baohua, the former deputy Bank, Cai Guohua, received a suspended death
director of China’s National Energy sentence for corruption, embezzlement, bribery
Administration. and illegal loan issuance, with illicit gains
allegedly amounting to RMB 10.3 billion (~USD
• In November, China’s anti-graft watchdog 1.45 billion).
announced an investigation into Shen Diancheng, a
former executive at China National Petroleum • In January 2021, Lai Xiaomin, the former head of
Corporation. China Huarong Asset Management Co., Ltd., was
sentenced to death for bribery, embezzlement, and
• In December, authorities announced two high-profile bigamy. He allegedly collected or sought to collect
anti-corruption investigations of officials in the bribes totaling RMB 1.79 billion (~USD 277
financial sector in China’s Chongqing province: million). This is one of the harshest punishments
Jiang Bin, a former official of the Export-Import for corruption-related convictions imposed by
Bank of China and Mao Bihua, the former party China in recent years.
secretary and director of the Chongqing division of
the China Securities Regulatory Commission. Key Takeaways
Energy and Finance sectors are highly nationalized
• Also in December, the Shanghai anti-graft watchdog
announced an investigation into Xu Zhen, former and subject to extensive regulatory oversight.
Chairman of Shanghai Clearing House. Heavily scrutinize transactions with state-owned
banks, such as loans or permits.
Sources: SCMP, Corruption in China: deputy head of energy agency Liu Baohua under investigation (December 30, 2020)
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/politics/article/3105931/corruption-china-deputy-head-energy-agency-liu-baohua-under; Caixin Global, Former top CNPC Executive Comes
Under Graft Probe (December 30, 2020) https://www.caixinglobal.com/2020-11-05/former-top-cnpc-executive-comes-under-graft-probe-101623179.html; Reuters, China’s Hengfeng
Bank ex-chairman Cai sentenced to death with two-year reprieve (December 30, 2020) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-crime-hengfeng-idUSKBN27M0LO; Caixin Global, 18
Dismissed Policy Bank Official Involved in Bribery (December 30, 2020) https://www.caixinglobal.com/2020-12-07/dismissed-policy-bank-official-involved-in-bribery-
101636646.html; Caixin Global, Former Chongqing Securities Inspection Chief Comes Under Investigation (December 30, 2020) https://www.caixinglobal.com/2020-12-05/former-
chongqing-securities-inspection-chief-comes-under-investigation-101635916.html; Washington Post, Former Head of China State Asset Firm Sentenced to Death (January 10, 2021)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/former-head-of-china-state-asset-firm-sentenced-to-death/2021/01/05/075ea892-4f46-11eb-a1f5-fdaf28cfca90_story.html.China: Enforcement Trend – Industry Alert
In 2020, the Chinese government has implemented policy changes and launched
nationwide campaigns targeting the healthcare industry as part of its anti-bribery and
anti-corruption efforts:
• In August 2020, the Chinese government rolled out a nationwide campaign to combat
impropriety in the medical sales and services industry.
• According to an article published on the website of the Central Commission of Discipline
Inspection of the Chinese Communist Party, the campaign specifically targets the provision
of kickbacks in the medical industry.
• Since August 2020, the Chinese government has
carried out a series of public hospital audits to crack
down on improper payments or other benefits
disguised as donations and academic sponsorships,
including speaker fees.
• Doctors at certain public hospitals were reportedly
required to produce records regarding speaker fees,
including personal bank statements.
Sources: Sources: PharmaNet, 开始全国检查开票、医药代表销售、给回扣 (December 30, 2020)
http://news.pharmnet.com.cn/news/2020/08/13/543865.html; Sohu, 【彻查】大三甲医院彻查讲课 19
费，多家外企被卷入 (December 30, 2020) https://www.sohu.com/a/418190356_100092991.China: Enforcement Trend – Industry Alert
(cont’d)
On November 18, 2020, PRC authorities issued an “Operating Manual” to provincial authorities,
directing them to implement a “credit rating system” for medical device and pharmaceutical
manufacturers, distributors, logistics companies and company agents.
• The manual prohibits kickbacks and other improper benefits to state-run healthcare facilities
and procurement agencies, as well as falsified documentation.
• Manufacturers, distributors, or other companies found to have committed “Particularly Serious”
violations will be banned from transacting with public procurement agencies.
• Companies must also sign a compliance declaration and report any judgment or fine relating to
(among other things) bribery to provincial authorities.
Key Takeaway: Medical device companies that rely on distributors should re-assess their due
diligence and monitoring program to ensure that their distributors are qualified to participate in
public tenders.
Source: National Healthcare Security Administration Drug Pricing and Tender Procurement Guidance Center, Operating Manual on
the Drug Pricing and Procurement Credit Rating 2020 (December 30, 2020) http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2020- 20
11/28/content_5565653.htm.China: Enforcement Trend – Industry Alert
(cont’d)
In December, Chinese authorities passed the “Administrative Measures (Trial) for the Registration
of Medical Representatives.” These measures seek to reduce corruption involving marketing
employees and representatives promoting products to Chinese healthcare practitioners (“HCPs”).
Who is a medical representative? What is required? What conduct is prohibited?
Marketing Authorization
An individual who: Medical representatives are prohibited
Holders (“MAHs”) must
(1) prepares academic programs from:
register their medical
to promote medical products; (1) Conducting promotional academic
representatives with the
(2) provides information on activities without registration;
China Pharmaceutical
medical products to HCPs; (2) Conducting promotional academic
Association.
(3) assists HCPs in the use of activities without consent from
medical products; or medical institutions;
Foreign MAHs are
(4) collects feedback on the use (3) Directly providing donations,
subject to the same
of medical products, or financial aids, or sponsorships to
requirements, and must
information on the hospitals’ HCPs; and
comply with these
demand for these products. (4) Collecting information on the
provisions through their
quantities of drugs prescribed by
domestic agents.
HCPs.
Sources: National Medical Products Administration, Administrative Measures (Trial) for the Registration of Medical Representatives
(December 30, 2020) https://www.nmpa.gov.cn/directory/web/nmpa/xxgk/ggtg/qtggtg/20200930163955170.html. 21International Enforcement: Cooperation from
Chinese Regulators
2020 saw indicia of willingness on the part of the Chinese securities regulators to provide
assistance and cooperate with regulators from other jurisdictions:
• In December 2020, Hong Kong’s Financial Reporting Council (“FRC”), which oversees the auditing of
companies listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (“HKEx”), announced that it received from the
Supervision and Evaluation Bureau of China’s Finance Ministry the first batch of audit papers of Mainland
Chinese companies listed on the HKEx.
• This disclosure came pursuant to a memorandum of understanding signed between the FRC and the
Chinese Finance Ministry in 2019, after several years of discussions.
• Previously, the Chinese government has barred audit papers from being handed over to regulators in other
jurisdictions on the basis that the papers fall within the broad scope of “state secrets.”
• The Finance Ministry passed the papers to the FRC after obtaining clearances from the relevant Mainland
Chinese authorities, including the State Secrets Bureau.
• To date, China continues to refuse to let representatives of the U.S. Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board review audits of Chinese companies that are listed on U.S. stock exchanges.
• In December 2020, the SEC announced that China’s Luckin Coffee has agreed to pay a USD 180 million
penalty to settle accounting fraud charges. The SEC credited the Chinese Securities Regulatory Commission
(“CSRC”) for cooperating with the investigation. The CSRC separately initiated an investigation in April
2020 into fraud allegations against Luckin Coffee.
Sources: SCMP, ‘State secrets’ no more: Hong Kong regulator gains access to HKEX-listed Chinese firms’ audit papers in
breakthrough (December 30, 2020) https://www.scmp.com/business/banking-finance/article/3113210/state-secrets-no-more-hong- 22
kong-regulator-gains-access.International Enforcement: Practical
Challenges to Gathering Evidence in China
International Criminal Judicial Assistance Law (“ICJA Law”)
China’s ICJA Law, which became effective in October 2018, governs mutual assistance between
China and foreign countries in criminal cases.
• The ICJA Law stipulates that no individual or entity within Chinese territory is allowed to provide foreign
countries with evidence, materials, or assistance in connection with criminal cases without the consent of
the Chinese government.
• Approval from the government is required before any person or entity in China may comply with a foreign
subpoena in relation to a criminal matter.
• The ICJA Law is ambiguous on several key points, including penalties for violations and the process for
obtaining government permission to cooperate with foreign court orders. It is also unclear how the law
would affect the operation of existing MLATs between China and other countries.
Key Takeaways:
The ICJA Law may create competing legal obligations for MNCs with ties to China and other jurisdictions.
The ICJA Law may have unintended consequences in U.S. litigation involving MNCs, with U.S. authorities citing the ICJA
Law as grounds for bypassing the existing MLAA regime to compel document production due to the uncertainty in how the
law will be implemented.
Sources: National People’s Congress, 中华人民共和国国际刑事司法协助法 (October 26, 2018) 23
http://www.npc.gov.cn/zgrdw/npc/xinwen/2018-10/26/content_2064576.htmInternational Enforcement: Practical
Challenges to Gathering Evidence in China
State Secrets Laws
• China has enacted a series of legislation to control the disclosure and transmission of data deemed
to be “state secrets.” Among other restrictions, the laws prohibit the transfer of state secrets out of
Mainland China without approval from the Chinese government. The difficulty in navigating
China’s state secrets regime lies in the fact that the laws provide only broadly-defined categories of
information that constitutes “state secrets,” with the Chinese authorities maintaining broad
discretion in the ultimate classification.
Key Takeaways
China Securities Laws • Always consult with PRC-qualified
• Article 177 of the newly amended China Securities counsel prior to collecting data or
transferring data outside of China.
Law prohibits “foreign regulators from directly
• Significant ambiguity continues to
conducting investigations and collecting evidence” in
surround the blocking statute.
China and restricts Chinese companies from sharing Communicate about PRC law challenges
documents related to their securities activities with with non-PRC regulators making
foreign regulators unless they obtain prior approval information requests.
from the China Securities Regulatory Commission. • Review your internal document storage
protocols to ensure sensitive data is not
inadvertently transferred outside of China
without prior review.
http://www.npc.gov.cn/zgrdw/npc/xinwen/2018-10/26/content_2064576.htm; Central People’s Government, 中华人民共和国保守国家
秘密法 (January 5, 2021) http://www.gov.cn/flfg/2010-04/30/content_1596420.htm; China Securities Regulatory Commission, 中华人
民共和国证券法 (January 5, 2021) http://www.csrc.gov.cn/pub/tianjin/tjfzyd/tjjflfg/tjgjfl/201912/t20191231_368792.htm. 24International Enforcement: Additional
Disclosure Measures from the U.S.
In the final two months of 2020, the U.S. imposed new disclosure guidelines on issuers based in,
or with the majority of their operations in, Mainland China (“China-based issuers”). These are
the latest steps taken by the U.S. to tighten enforcement of securities laws against China-based
issuers:
In November, the SEC issued disclosure In December, President Trump signed into law the
guidance for China-based issuers, which Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, which
sets out five broad categories of risks would increase oversight of Chinese companies listed on
that China-based issuers must disclose U.S. stock markets. Among other measures, the law
as part of their SEC disclosure requires companies to disclose more information about
obligations. Among other risk ties to foreign governments and the Chinese
categories, the SEC requires China- Communist Party, and allows the Public Company
based issuers to disclose any limitations Accounting Oversight Board to inspect the audit
on the SEC’s ability to inspect the papers for audits of non-U.S. operations. The law also
company’s audit papers, as well as risks empowers the SEC to prohibit a company from trading
relating to the quality of their financial in the U.S. if the company fails to comply with the
statements. disclosure requirements for three consecutive years.
Sources: SEC, Disclosure Considerations for China-Based Issuers (December 30, 2020) https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/disclosure-
considerations-china-based-issuers; SCMP, Donald Trump signs law that could delist Chinese companies from US stock exchanges
25
(December 30, 2020) https://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/3114603/donald-trump-signs-law-could-delist-chinese-companies-us-
stock-exchanges; NY Times, Chinese Companies to Face More Scrutiny as Bill Clears House (December 30, 2020)
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/02/business/economy/chinese-companies-to-face-more-scrutiny-as-bill-clears-house.html.Lessons Learned from 2020 FCPA
Enforcement Actions Involving China
Background: The company allegedly paid bribes Background: Cardinal China acted as an exclusive
to government officials in China to influence distributor for a European skincare supplier, and
procurement decisions. Certain bribes were paid managed a marketing fund on behalf of the supplier.
through a consultant with which the company The SEC alleged that Cardinal China allowed
entered into a fake consulting agreement for employees to use the marketing fund to, among other
“campaign” work. In addition, Airbus China things, make payments to employees of state-owned
established a fund that was used to sponsor travel, retail outlets that had influence over purchasing
leisure and entertainment activities attended by decisions. The SEC alleged that Cardinal failed to
Chinese government officials. properly assess the risks of the marketing fund, which
Lessons: (1) carefully scrutinize the use of led to a failure to apply critical accounting controls
consultants in high-risk jurisdictions; (2) and properly train marketing employees.
implement a system of internal controls that Lessons: (1) enhance oversight of employees’
ensures effective oversight of subsidiaries’ interactions with third parties, such as marketing
retention of and payments to third-party agents; consultants; (2) conduct compliance risk assessments
(3) devote resources to monitor compliance with to identify control gaps and take remedial actions to
policies governing travel and entertainment improve internal controls; (3) ensure full visibility
benefits for government officials and SOE into activities of employees and third parties acting on
customers. behalf of the company.
26INDIA
Photo courtesy Ken Wieland
27India: Market Characteristics & COVID-19
Impact
Percentage of “Middle Class” in
28% India. Projected to be the largest
in the world by 2035.
Domestic consumption as a
60% percentage of India’s GDP.
Among Top 10 FDI Recipients in
USD 51 Billion 2019.
Expected contraction of the
Indian economy in 2020-2021 –
-10.3% but expected to bounce back with
8.8% growth in 2021.
Second highest in confirmed
2nd COVID-19 cases but relatively
low case mortality.
Sources: Population Reference Bureau, India Rising (August 2018); UNCTAD, World Investment Report 2020 (2020); The World
Bank: Gross Domestic Product 2019; Maryam Aslany, The Indian middle class, its size, and urban-rural variations (February 2019); 28
IMF, World Economic Outlook (October, 2020); Photo Credits: sandeepachetan.com and Arian Zwegers.India: Trends over the Last Decade v.
Situation on the Ground
India has improved on anti-corruption indexes over the last decade (2010-2019).
Slow Progress on Anti-Corruption
Initiatives:
India moved up 11 spots on TI’s
91 >>> 80 Corruption Perception Index.
• Despite legislation in 2014
establishing the Lokpal, India’s
anti-corruption ombudsman, the
India’s percentile rank for “control members were not appointed until
38.6 >>> 47.6 of corruption” improved between 2019 and the body did not
2010 and 2019. become fully operationalized
until March 2020.
However, bribery and corruption continue to be a significant risk in India: • The prosecution wing of the
Lokpal is yet to be
89% 39% 80% operationalized.
of Indians polled as part of of survey respondents believe • The Whistleblowers Protection
of Indian public service users paid Act, passed in 2014, has not yet
the 2020 Global Corruption business disruption caused by the
bribes in the previous 12 month come into force.
Barometer survey believe COVID-19 pandemic could spur
period– which is the highest rate
corruption in government is a fraud in India over the next 2 years.
amongst Asian jurisdictions. • No provisions in Indian law
“big problem”.
covering bribery of foreign
officials.
Sources: Transparency International, Corruption Perceptions Index (2010-2019) (The methodology changed in 2012); Transparency
International, “Asia Pacific: Little to No Progress on Anti-Corruption” (29 January 2019); Transparency International, Global 29
Corruption Barometer – Asia (2020); Worldwide Governance Indicators Source Data (2019); Deloitte, “India Corporate Fraud
Perception Survey Edition IV” (2020).India: Prevention of Corruption Act – Tackling
Demand and Supply
Key Provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (“PCA”)
A. Tackling the Demand Side
§7 Prohibits Indian public servants from obtaining (or attempting to obtain) “any undue advantage” with the
intention of (or as a reward for) performing or causing performance of a public duty “improperly or dishonestly”
or forbearing or causing forbearance to perform such duty. (Basic Prohibition).
§ 7A Prohibits any person (such as intermediaries, “fixers”) from accepting any “undue advantage” from anyone in
order to cause a public servant to perform his public duties in an improper or dishonest manner.
§ 2(d) “Undue Advantage” is very broadly defined to include any gratification whatsoever other than legal
remuneration.
B. Tackling the Supply Side
§ 12 Prior to the 2018 Amendment, bribe giving could only be prosecuted under Section 12 of the PCA, as abetment to
acceptance of a bribe by a public servant. Now there is a specific provision prohibiting the giving or offering of a
bribe.
§8 Prohibits the giving of (or the promise to give) an “undue advantage” to anyone with the intent of inducing or
rewarding the improper performance of a public duty by a public servant.
Note: Bribe giver will not be liable if (a) she can prove that she was compelled to give the bribe; and (b) she reports the
bribe within 7 days to law enforcement authorities.
Pointers on the PCA:
• Facilitation Payments: The amended PCA specifically clarifies that routine payments, or speed money, are also
prohibited. (§ 7)
• Exception: Proving that one has been compelled to provide a bribe to a public servant will be difficult and may cause the
person involved to have to participate in lengthy legal proceedings. Do not rely on this exception.
30India: Prevention of Corruption Act – Tackling
Demand and Supply (cont’d)
The PCA contains key obligations and potential liabilities for companies and their management.
§9 A commercial organization can be held liable “if any person associated with the commercial organisation gives or
promises to give any undue advantage to a public servant” with an intent to obtain or retain business or any
advantage for that commercial organization.
• Commercial organizations can be held liable for the actions of their employees, agents, service providers, and
professional advisers.
• A foreign parent company can be held liable for the actions of its Indian subsidiary.
Note: Commercial organizations can avoid liability for a bribe provided by a person associated with them by
demonstrating that the bribe was provided to the public servant despite the organization putting in place “adequate
procedures designed to prevent” it. The Indian government is expected to provide guidelines regarding such
procedures.
Until the Indian government provides these guidelines, follow global best-practices.
§ 10 Managerial personnel of a commercial organization will be liable if the prosecution is able to establish that such
personnel consented to or connived with the person committing the offense under the PCA.
Managerial personnel may face up to 7 years’ imprisonment and/or monetary fines.
India’s Companies Act places additional obligations on companies and their management.
§ 134(5) Requires directors of all companies to certify annually that “proper systems to ensure compliance with the
provisions of all applicable laws and that such systems were adequate and operating effectively” are in
place.
§§ 134(8), 447 Significant penalties for fraud and non-compliance, which include fines and prison for “officers of the
company.”
31India: Understand Your Disclosure
Obligations
The disclosure clauses of the Companies Act continue to cause considerable confusion.
Understanding your disclosure obligations is critical.
WHO Must Disclose?
• The Companies Act imposes an obligation on statutory auditors to report to the government instances of
fraud committed by the employees and officers of a company “within such time and in such manner as may
be prescribed.”
WHAT Must Be Disclosed?
• The Companies Act defines “fraud” to include “any act, omission, concealment of any fact or abuse of
position” committed by any person “with intent to deceive, to gain undue advantage from, or to injure
the interests of, the company or its shareholders . . .”
• Guidance published by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in India urges auditors to consider
reporting instances of bribery and corruption to the government under this clause. It is not clear,
however, that bribery meets the definition of fraud absent an intent to gain an undue advantage from, or
to injure the interests of, the company.
• Broadly speaking, for frauds involving INR 10M (~USD 150,000) or more, auditors must report the
alleged fraud to the company, which is given 45 days to respond before the report and response are
forwarded to the government. For frauds less than INR 10M, the auditors are required to notify the
company’s board of directors. The board is then required to disclose details of the fraud, and the remedial
action taken by the company in relation to fraud, in its annual report, which is filed with the Registrar of
Companies.
32India: Evolving and Uncertain Disclosure
Obligations
2020 brought additional disclosure obligations that may impact the way companies respond to
compliance-related reports and conduct internal investigations.
Disclosure Obligations Relating to Whistleblower Reports
• Statutory auditors of Indian companies must disclose whether they have considered whistleblower reports made to the
company. Companies, in turn, must disclose whistleblower reports to their auditors. This requirement comes into effect
from FY 2020-21 and generally applies to companies listed in India and those with loans from public banks.
Forensic Audit Disclosures
Key Takeaways
• In September 2020, SEBI determined that companies listed on Indian More than ever, it is important to engage
stock exchanges must disclose information regarding the initiation of knowledgeable and trustworthy auditors.
any forensic audit—irrespective of materiality. While the rules, Auditors who are unfamiliar with the nuances
applicability, and reporting mechanisms await further clarification, or the disclosure requirements may be tempted
under the decision, listed companies must disclose the following: to provide far more information than is
required out of an abundance of caution.
o that it has initiated a forensic audit; Conversely, seasoned auditors can help you
tailor your audit activity and resulting
o the name of the entity initiating the forensic audit and reasons disclosures to maintain confidentiality to the
for initiating the audit; and extent possible, while staying compliant with
the applicable regulations.
o the final forensic audit report (other than for forensic audits
initiated by regulatory or enforcement agencies), along with
any comments from company management.
33India: A Federal System with Multiple,
Intersecting Enforcement Agencies
An array of central- and state-level enforcement agencies
increase the risk of dual enforcement. Understanding the
agencies under which your organization is regulated is key.
• Lokpal, the new federal anti-corruption
Central Bureau of Central Vigilance Central Lokpal watchdog, commenced operations in March
Investigation (“CBI”) Commission 2020.
• Lokpal has broad powers to investigate any
person (which includes legal entities) involved
in aiding violations of the PCA, bribe giving
or taking, or conspiracy related to any
Financial Intelligence Unit –
Serious Fraud Investigation
violation of the PCA.
Enforcement Directorate Ministry of Finance
Office (Companies Act) • As of October 2020, Lokpal has received
1,496 complaints, and disposed of over 1,347
of these.
• According to Transparency International’s
2020 Global Barometer Survey, 73% of
State-Level respondents in India thought their anti-
Lokayuktas/Vigilance
State-Level Anti-Corruption corruption agency is doing well in the fight
Bureaux against corruption.
Commissions
34India: Trend — Dip in Domestic Anti-Corruption
Enforcement against Public Officials
Have amendments to the PCA adversely impacted anti-corruption Cases Registered under the PCA
enforcement?
1500
The 2018 Amendments 1000
• The PCA was amended in 2018 - the most significant amendments to
the PCA since its inception in 1988. 500
• Under a new provision of the PCA (Section 17A) - Prior sanction of
0
the relevant government (state or central government or other
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
competent authorities) is required before commencing an
investigation under the PCA. Registered Cases
• Previously, only prosecution of public officials required pre- Number of Public Servants
approval.
• Under the amendments, the relevant government authority has to Delays Result in Massive CBI Backlog
“endeavour” to provide consent for both commencing investigation The dip in new cases has not affected the large
and prosecution within 3 months of receiving an approval request. backlog of pending investigations. At the end
Key Enforcement Statistics of 2019 (most recent statistics available):
• The decline in the number of cases registered under the PCA has • 744 CBI cases have been pending for over
accelerated between 2017 and 2019. a year. 678 of these are PCA-related.
• At the end of 2018, 44 cases had not received government approval • 25 corruption investigations have been
to proceed, despite the request pending for over 3 months. The pending for over five years.
number for 2019 rose to 82 cases. • As of December 2019, 1,239 total
corruption investigations pending.
Sources: Annual Reports of the Central Vigilance Commission between 2015 and 2019
35India: Local Enforcement Actions Continue
The decline in local enforcement numbers, however, does not necessarily reflect the situation on the
ground, as evidenced by continued corruption scandals and investigations, as well as public perception that
corruption remains a part of everyday life.
• Media outlets reported that, in early 2020, the Enforcement Directorate re-
started a long-running investigation into whether Indian Airlines’ 2006
purchase of 43 jets from Airbus SE, valued at ~USD 30 million, involved
improper payments.
• Indian authorities recently charged the former CEO of ICICI Bank, Chanda
Kochhar, and her husband with providing favorable bank loans to private
companies, which in turn invested funds in businesses held by the couple.
• The CBI has been active in other areas. In
2020, the Bureau registered 190 cases against
private companies for alleged bank fraud. In
total, the CBI alleges these companies Key Takeaways
siphoned off approximately USD 8.2 billion • The CBI does not need prior approval to commence a PCA
from dozens of Indian banks investigation into private parties. Look for the bureau to take
“[A] large number of cases numbering around the path of least resistance by increasing private sector
800 were disposed of during the year gone by enforcement.
(2020) despite the huge challenges of the Covid- • The CBI is not limited to cases under the PCA. Corrupt
19 pandemic, which caused tremendous hurdles in conduct may fall under other areas of CBI’s remit, such as
the operations in various walks of life”
bank fraud, forex violations, and import and export violations.
– CBI Spokesman RC Joshi (Jan. 1, 2020) • Look for the CBI to significantly ramp up investigations once
the COVID-19 pandemic wanes.
Sources: Bloomberg, India steps up Airbus Probe in wake of global bribery settlement (February 18, 2020)
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-18/india-steps-up-airbus-probe-in-wake-of-global-bribery-settlement; Reuters, India
court remands former ICICI bank CEO’s husnand in police custody (September 16, 2020) https://www.reuters.com/article/india- 36
fraud/india-court-remands-former-icici-bank-ceos-husband-in-police-custody-idUSKBN25Z13L; Deccan Herald, CBI Concluded
Investigation in Around 800 Cases in 2020: Agency Chief (January 1, 2020) https://www.deccanherald.com/national/cbi-concluded-
investigation-in-around-800-cases-in-2020-agency-chief-934042.htmlIndia: Lessons Learned from the Beam Suntory
FCPA Resolution
• In October 2020, Beam – a Chicago-headquartered spirits maker, agreed to a USD 19.6 million settlement with the DOJ
to resolve allegations that its Indian subsidiary (“Beam India”) made improper payments to Indian officials through
third party promoters and distributors.
• In exchange for the payments, the company received improved visibility of Beam products in state-owned depots and
retail stores, and obtained operational registrations and licenses. The payments were subsequently falsely recorded in
Beam India’s books and records.
• The DOJ noted that Beam, including employees in Beam’s Key Takeaways
legal department, failed to rectify inadequacies identified by
external accounting and law firms, and instead attempted to • The case highlights the benefits of both
prematurely terminate or limit compliance reviews in an cooperation with DOJ/SEC, and coordinating a
effort to keep them from affecting an impending public resolution strategy with both agencies.
offering of Beam securities.
• The DOJ also noted that Beam did not perform pre- • Enforcement authorities expect companies to
acquisition due diligence on Beam India, which had a long perform robust pre-acquisition due diligence,
history of making improper payments. particularly where targets operate in high-risk
• The DOJ did not provide Beam with any credit for the industries/markets.
penalty (USD 2 million) that it paid to the SEC as a part of
its 2018 resolution arising from the same conduct since • Even legal and compliance department employees
“Beam did not seek to coordinate a parallel resolution with need adequate training and monitoring.
the department”. Enforcement authorities expect these employees
to be knowledgeable and experienced, and to act
as the company’s line of defense against corrupt
conduct.
37AFRICA
38Africa: Market Characteristics
Estimated population is
1.35 billion, half of whom
will be under 25 years • At the start of 2020, Africa’s economic growth was estimated to be
old by 2050 3.9%.
• Led by the economies of Rwanda, Ethiopia, Cote d’Ivoire, Ghana,
Tanzania and Benin, these countries were among the world’s 10 fastest
GDP of USD 1.8 trillion (2019) growing economies.
• The COVID-19 pandemic reversed the robust growth projections
Due to COVID-19, the expected at the start of 2020.
continent’s economies • Instead, economies in Sub-Saharan African countries are expected to
contracted by -3.3% in decline by an aggregate -3.3% in 2020.
2020
• Such a recession could result in losses between USD 115 billion and
USD 189.7 billion.
Growth is projected to be
between 2.1 and 3.1% in • An economic recovery between 2.1% and 3.1% is anticipated in 2021,
contingent on the availability and deployment of COVID-19 vaccines
2021 and governments’ ability to manage infection rates.
Sources: Africa Population, Worldometer (Dec. 17, 2020); World Economic Outlook, International Monetary Fund (Oct. 2020);
African Economic Outlook 2020, Supplement: Amid COVID-19, African Development Bank Group (June 22, 2020); Africa’s 39
Pulse, Charting the Road to Recovery, World Bank Group (Oct. 22, 2020).Africa: Impact of COVID-19
Proj. Actual Proj.
2020 2020 2021
Over 1.2 million cases 2020 GDP:
reported. GDP GDP GDP
Nigeria
Over 37,000 deaths.
2% -4.3% 1.7%
• GDP: USD 448 billion
Per capita income across
Sub-Saharan Africa 1.1% -7.8% 3.0%
South Africa
reduced by an estimated • GDP: USD 351.4 billion to
-6.5%. -11.5%
More than 40 million Ethiopia
Africans could be thrust 7.2% 1.9% -0.023%
• GDP: USD 95.9 billion
into extreme poverty as a
result of COVID-19.
Kenya
6% 1 4.67%
• GDP: USD 95.5 billion
Sources: World Economic Outlook, International Monetary Fund (Oct. 2020); African Economic Outlook 2020,
Supplement: Amid COVID-19, African Development Bank Group (June 22, 2020); Africa’s Pulse, Charting the Road to 40
Recovery, World Bank Group (Oct. 22, 2020).Africa: Corruption Climate
COVID-19 has exacerbated corruption concerns
The African Development Bank Without effective oversight,
estimates that corruption costs corruption resulted in:
USD 148 billion per year.
• Price gouging of medical
equipment and supplies.
Efforts to confront the • Procurement-related
pandemic’s onset have led to corruption/fraud in
an erosion of the controls and purchasing medical
oversight necessary to mitigate equipment.
corruption.
• Undue preferential
treatment based on
Reports in Nigeria, Rwanda, relationships to individuals in
Zimbabwe and other nations power.
indicate that hundreds of
millions of dollars in COVID-
19 foreign aid have gone • Petty corruption in the
unaccounted for. receipt of healthcare.
Sources: Africa’s Lawyers offer a View into the Dept and Scale of Corruption On the Continent, Law.com, August 04, 2020;
Transparency, Accountability and Anti-Corruption in COVID-19 Crisis Response and Recovery, UNDP, July 11, 2020; 41
Citizens Struggle as Promised COVID-19 Aid Goes Missing, Transparency International, September 16, 2020.Africa: Regional Cooperation in Anti-
Corruption Efforts
Regional actors like the African Union and its Advisory Board on
Corruption are maintaining cooperative initiatives like the African Anti-
Corruption Day.
• In a July 11, 2020 virtual meeting, the African Union Commission and the African
Union Advisory Board on Corruption (“AUABC”) issued statements
commemorating the 4th Edition of the African Anti-Corruption Day. The statements
also highlighted the AUABC’s role in pursuit of effective anti-corruption measures
and the ratification by Equatorial Guinea and Tunisia of the African Union
Convention on Preventing and Combatting Corruption.
• On November 2, 2020, the AUABC and the African Commission on Human and
Peoples’ Rights issued a joint statement on the effects of COVID-19 on anti-
corruption efforts in Africa. The statement expressed concern and alarm over reports
of misuse of emergency relief funds and Personal Protective Equipment, price
gouging and the creation of artificial shortages of essential goods. The statement
called on states to implement stringent anti-corruption measures, including
transparent and accountable processes.
Sources: Statement of the Chairperson of the African Union Commission on the Commemoration of The African Anti-
Corruption Day, July 11, 2020, African Union; Statement of the Chairperson of the African Union Advisory Board on
Corruption, July 11, 2020, African Union; Joint Statement of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the 42
African Union Advisory Board on Corruptions, November 2, 2020, African Union.Africa: Increasing Local Enforcement
Several leaders of Africa’s largest economies, including Nigeria’s Muhammadu Buhari
(elected May 2015), South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa (February 2018), Algeria’s
Abdelmadjid Tebboune (elected December 2019), Angola’s João Lourenço (September
2017), and Ethiopia’s Abiy Ahmed (April 2018), have identified rooting out corruption as
priorities.
Angola: The Angolan Supreme Court sentenced Jose Filomeno dos Santos to a five-year jail
sentence for fraud while he headed the state’s sovereign wealth fund from 2013 to 2018. Dos Santos is
the son of former president Jose Eduardo dos Santos—in power from 1979 to 2017. Besides dos
Santos, three other co-defendants were sentenced to prison terms for fraud and embezzlement,
including the former governor of the National Bank of Angola Valter Filipe da Silva. Dos Santos is
accused of transferring USD 500 million to a Swiss bank account.
Democratic Republic of Congo: The DRC’s highest court sentenced Vital Kamerhe and a co-
defendant—a Lebanese businessman named Jammal Samih—to 20 years in jail for embezzling over
USD 48 million. Kamerhe is President Felix Tshisekedi’s former chief of staff, and is the most senior
DRC politician to face corruption charges in the central African state.
Sources: Angola Sentences Ex-President’s Son to Five-year Jail for Fraud, Al Jazeera, Aug. 14, 2020; DRC President’s
Top Aide Gets 20-year Jail Term for Corruption, Al Jazeera, June 20, 2020. 43Africa: Increasing Local Enforcement (cont’d)
Kenya: In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission opened an
investigation into the disappearance of medical supplies and equipment received from organizations such as
the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Health Organization. The investigation
unearthed what is now called the “Covid-19 millionaires scandal,” in which they discovered that price-
gougers were selling medical supplies to the Kenya Medical Supplies Authority at three times the market rate.
In December 2020, the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission arrested Robert Pavel Oimeke, the head of
Kenya’s energy sector regulator, over bribery allegations, and Kenya’s capital assembly impeached Mike
Sonko, the governor of Nairobi, for charges including abuse of office, gross misconduct, breaking the law,
and failing to approve a budget.
Maldives: Former Vice President Ahmed Adeeb was sentenced to 20 years in prison and received a
USD 129,892 fine in relation to corruption charges, including embezzlement, money laundering, and
misuse of government authority. Adeeb was involved in a scheme in which property was sold at well
below market value, costing the government USD 259 million.
Sources: Kenya: Will Nairobi Governor Sonko find a way out of his impeachment?, The Africa Report, 4 Dec. 2020;
Medical mystery, Development and Cooperation, Dec. 13, 2020; African Soccer Chief Is Barred for Five Years Over Ethics 44
Violations, N.Y. Times, Nov. 23, 2020; PCCB Nods in CAF-TFF Saga, Daily News, Dec. 17, 2020; Maldives ex-VP Ahmed
Adeeb Sentenced to 20 Years for Corruption, Al Jazeera, Oct. 5, 2020.Africa: Increasing Local Enforcement (cont’d)
Nigeria: The Nigerian Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (“EFCC”) has continued its
investigations into the “Malabu Oil Scandal,” involving Shell and ENI’s purchase of an oilfield through an
alleged USD 1.3 billion corrupt deal made in 2011. In September 2020, the Federal Government of Nigeria
asked a court in Milan to order Shell and ENI to pay an advance payment of around USD 1 billion for damages
resulting from the fallout of the Malabu Oil Scandal.
South Africa: In December 2020, a special investigating unit arrested Ace Magashule - Secretary General of
the ANC - for crimes including fraud and money laundering. The arrest makes Magashule the highest-profile
serving politician to face charges since Ramaphosa took office.
Separately, reports of irregularities in government contracts related to the provision of COVID-19 medical
equipment and services prompted South African President Cyril Ramaphosa to convene a ministerial
committee to review the allegations. The contracts have included PPE purchases at inflated prices, and the
award of contracts to individuals connected to the government or the ruling African National Congress party.
Sources:Eni Gets Green Light In Nigeria Offshore Oil Block Doc Bid, Law360, 15 Oct. 2020; Nigeria asks for $1.1 billion
advance from Eni, Shell in graft case, Reuters, Sept. 9, 2020.; Africa’s Biggest Bank Says Ramaphosa Winning Graft Battle,
45
Bloomberg, Nov. 19, 2020; S. African Ruling Party Recommends Ramaphosa Rival Step Down, Bloomberg, Dec. 15, 2020.
South Africa Sets Up Body to Probe Coronavirus Corruption, Al Jazeera, Aug. 7, 2020; Senior South African ANC Official
Granted Bail in Corruption Case, Al Jazeera, Nov. 13, 2020;You can also read
