Apresentação

O presente blog foi criado em Janeiro de 2005.
Tem como linha de orientação não comentar processos ou casos concretos, menos ainda o que tenha a ver com a minha profissão, estando o meu site de Advogado aqui nele se mantendo o mesmo critério.

Canalizo para a rede social Linkedin as notícias que se reportam à vida jurídica internacional. O mesmo faço na rede social Twitter.

Email: joseantoniobarreiros@gmail.com

José António Barreiros




Cooperação criminal de empresas: o caso norte-americano



Os princípios básicos para o Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (1977), emendado (15 U.S.C. §§ 78dd-1, et seq.) foram estabelecidos há um ano, nos EUA, no memorando Yates [ver aqui].As regras orientadoras da cooperação para benefício por parte das empresas visadas pelas investigações sumaria-se nesta frase do mesmo:

«In order for a company to receive any consideration for cooperation under the Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations, the company must completely disclose to the Department all relevant facts about individual misconduct. Companies cannot pick and choose what facts to disclose. That is, to be eligible for any credit for cooperation, the company must identify all individuals involved in or responsible for the misconduct at issue, regardless of their position, status or seniority, and provide to the Department all facts relating to that misconduct. If a company seeking cooperation credit declines to learn of such facts or to provide the Department with complete factual information about individual wrongdoers, its cooperation will not be considered a mitigating factor pursuant to USAM 9-28.700 el seq. 2 Once a company meets the threshold requirement of providing all relevant facts with respect to individuals, it will be eligible for consideration for cooperation credit. The extent of that cooperation credit will depend on all the various factors that have traditionally applied in making this assessment (e.g., the timeliness of the cooperation, the diligence, thoroughness, and speed of the internal investigation, the proactive nature of the cooperation, etc.).»


Em resultado da actividade do organismo foram decretadas penas de prisão já significativamenet severas e que um estudo académico elencou aqui

1. Joel Esquenazi: 180 months (2011)

2. William Jefferson: 156 months (2009)

3. Charles Paul Edward Jumet: 87 months (2010)

4. Carlos Rodriguez: 84 months (2011)

4. Herbert Steindler: 84 months (1994)

5. Douglas Murphy: 63 months (2005)

6. Shu Quan-Sheng: 51 months (2009)

7. Benito Chinea: 48 months (2015)

7. Joseph Demeneses: 48 months (2015)

8. Jorge Granados: 46 months (2011)

9. David Kay: 37 months (2005)

9. John Webster Warwick: 37 months (2010)

10. Jose Alejandro Hurtado: 36 months (2015)

10. Faheem Mousa Salam: 36 months (2007)