In late December, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the conviction of Chi Ping Patrick Ho on seven counts alleging multiple FCPA and money laundering (and related conspiracy) violations.[1] The decision is notable for its construction of various FCPA provisions, and further demonstrates the expansive jurisdictional reach of anti-money laundering laws to dollar-denominated transfers.

Ho, a citizen of Hong Kong, served as an officer and director of the Hong Kong-based non-governmental organization China Energy Fund Committee (CEFC-NGO), which was funded by Shanghai-based energy conglomerate China CEFC Energy Company Limited (CEFC).[2] Ho also served as an officer and director of a CEFC-affiliated US non-profit (US NGO), funded by CEFC NGO.[3]

Ho’s conviction, for which he was sentenced to 36 months imprisonment and a US$400,000 fine,[4] stemmed from two alleged bribery schemes involving (1) an attempted US$2 million cash delivery to the President of Chad (which was purportedly rejected by the President) and (2) a US$500,000 wire transfer to a charity associated with the foreign minister of Uganda.[5] Notably, the US dollar-denominated wire originated from a bank in Hong Kong, which was transmitted through its operating unit in the United States as a correspondent to another bank in New York, which in turn was acting as a correspondent for a beneficiary bank in Uganda for final credit to an ultimate beneficiary NGO. Both acts were allegedly made for the benefit of CEFC’s commercial interests in Africa.[6]

On appeal, Ho challenged his 2018 conviction on a number of grounds.[7]

Continue Reading United States v. Ho

(This is a cross-post from Steptoe’s new Investigations and Enforcement Blog.)

In May 2020, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority, the authority charged with regulating financial firms and maintaining the integrity of the financial markets in the United Kingdom, reported that whistleblowing reports to the Financial Conduct Authority on workplace culture issues in 2019 had

(This is a cross-post from Steptoe’s new Investigations and Enforcement Blog.)

Federal prosecutors recently brought new indictments against U.S. academics in two separate cases involving alleged unreported ties to China. The Department of Justice moved forward its cases against the Harvard and University of Arkansas-affiliated professors as part of a broader push to combat

On June 1, 2020, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) Criminal Division, with little fanfare, issued updated guidance on the Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs (2020 Guidance). The document, which was released without any accompanying public announcement or explanation, updates an April 30, 2019 version of the document (2019 Guidance), as discussed in our May 9, 2019 Advisory. The 2019 Guidance updated original guidance published by the Division’s Fraud Section on February 8, 2017 (2017 Guidance), as discussed in our 2017 FCPA Mid-Year Review.

The DOJ’s evaluation of the effectiveness of a company’s compliance program continues to be a relevant factor to charging decisions under the Principles of Federal Prosecution of Business Organizations in the Justice Manual, as well as to an organization’s eligibility to receive a reduction in criminal fines calculated under the US Sentencing Guidelines (USSG); it is also important to the DOJ’s assessment of whether a monitor is warranted.

Continue Reading Client Advisory: DOJ Updates Corporate Compliance Program Guidance, Emphasizes Role of Data

The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently announced the formation of the Procurement Collusion Strike Force, which will focus on one of the DOJ’s top priorities: protecting public funds from bid rigging and fraud. As DOJ’s Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Criminal Enforcement stated in a speech just before the announcement, it is DOJ’s view that