Tag Archives: Andrew M. Levine

DOJ Announces Initiative to Combat AI-Assisted Crime

by Helen V. Cantwell, Andrew J. Ceresney, Avi Gesser, Andrew M. Levine, David A. O’Neil, Winston M. Paes, Jane Shvets, Bruce E. Yannett, and Douglas S. Zolkind

photos of the authors

Top (left to right): Helen V. Cantwell, Andrew J. Ceresney, Avi Gesser, Andrew M. Levine, and David A. O’Neil
Bottom (left to right): Winston M. Paes, Jane Shvets, Bruce E. Yannett, and Douglas S. Zolkind (photos courtesy of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP)

On February 14, 2024, Deputy Attorney General Lisa O. Monaco announced an initiative within the U.S. Department of Justice to ramp up the detection and prosecution of crimes perpetrated through artificial intelligence (AI) technology, including seeking harsher sentences for certain AI-assisted crimes. Monaco also announced a new effort to evaluate how the Department can best use AI internally to advance its mission while guarding against AI risks.

Continue reading →

SDNY Whistleblower Pilot Program Incentivizes Self-Disclosure and Cooperation

by Helen V. Cantwell, Andrew J. Ceresney, Andrew M. Levine, David A. O’Neil, Winston M. Paes, Jane Shvets, Bruce E. Yannett, Douglas S. Zolkind, Erich O. Grosz, and Rebecca Maria Urquiola

Photos of the authors

Top left to right: Helen V. Cantwell, Andrew J. Ceresney, Andrew M. Levine, David A. O’Neil, and Winston M. Paes.
Bottom left to right: Jane Shvets, Bruce E. Yannett, Douglas S. Zolkind, Erich O. Grosz, and Rebecca Maria Urquiola. (Photos courtesy of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP)

On Wednesday, January 10, 2024, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (“SDNY”) launched the SDNY Whistleblower Pilot Program (the “Program”).[1] The Program seeks to incentivize individuals to report criminal wrongdoing—including corporate control failures, state and local bribery, and fraudulent dealings involving public funds—before SDNY learns of the conduct and to fully cooperate with any resulting investigations and prosecutions. U.S. Attorney Damian Williams encouraged individuals “to come clean, cooperate, and get on the right side of the law,” cautioning “[c]all us before we call you.”[2]

Continue reading →

Congress Passes Foreign Extortion Prevention Act, Targeting “Demand Side” of Foreign Bribery

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, David A. O’Neil, Winston M. Paes, Jane Shvets, Bruce E. Yannett, Douglas S. Zolkind, and Erich O. Grosz

Top left to right: Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, David A. O’Neil, and Winston M. Paes
Bottom left to right: Jane Shvets, Bruce E. Yannett, Douglas S. Zolkind, and Erich O. Grosz (Photos courtesy of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP)

On December 14, 2023, the U.S. Congress approved the Foreign Extortion Prevention Act (“FEPA”), which will make it a federal crime for any foreign government official to demand or receive a bribe from a U.S. citizen, resident or company in exchange for taking or omitting to take official action or conferring any improper business-related advantage.[1] This legislation, which is part of the National Defense Authorization Act and expected to be signed into law by President Biden, substantially expands U.S. enforcement authority with respect to foreign bribery and aligns with the Biden Administration’s elevation of anti-corruption enforcement to a national security priority.

Continue reading →

FinCEN Issues Advisory on Kleptocracy and Foreign Public Corruption

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, Satish Kini, Robert Dura, and Lily D. Vo

On April 14, 2022, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) released its “Advisory on Kleptocracy and Foreign Public Corruption” (the “Advisory”), directing covered financial institutions to focus their efforts on identifying the proceeds of foreign public corruption, which is a priority for the Biden administration.[1] The Advisory focuses on so-called “kleptocrats,” defined as individuals who use “their position and influence to enrich themselves and their networks of corrupt actors,” as well as other corrupt public officials who may launder the proceeds of their corruption through financial institutions.

Continue reading →

SEC Brings its First Corporate Anti-Corruption Action of 2022

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, Karolos Seeger, and Konstantin Bureiko

On February 17, 2022, the SEC brought a settled FCPA administrative proceeding against KT Corporation (“KT” or the “Company”), a South Korean telecom operator with American depository shares trading on the New York Stock Exchange.[1]  In its Cease-and-Desist Order (the “Order”), the SEC found that KT engaged in multiple schemes to make improper payments in Korea and Vietnam, including through purported charitable donations and third-party payments.  The SEC also found that KT paid executives inflated bonuses in order to generate slush funds to pay for gifts and illegal political contributions.  As a result of the settlement, the Company agreed to pay $6.3 million in disgorgement and civil penalties, and to a two-year reporting obligation.[2]  The settlement with the SEC came several months after the Company and fourteen executives were indicted in South Korea for the political contribution scheme.

Of particular note, the KT settlement is the SEC’s most recent action involving charitable contributions, and it goes somewhat beyond earlier cases in that the Order does not find that the donations were made as part of any quid pro quo.  It is also a cautionary tale demonstrating various ways that slush funds can be created.

Continue reading →

District Court Addresses Issues Arising from Corporate Investigations and Voluntary Cooperation with DOJ

by Andrew M. Levine, Jane Shvets, and Bruce Yannett

A judge in the District Court of New Jersey recently held that voluntary cooperation with a DOJ investigation is insufficient by itself to establish personal jurisdiction over a foreign entity but can broadly waive privilege. This ruling, issued on February 1, 2022 by Judge Kevin McNulty, involves the ongoing trial of former Cognizant executives Gordon Coburn and Steven Schwartz.[1] Coburn and Schwartz allegedly violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the “FCPA”) in connection with Cognizant’s business in India, the basis of Cognizant’s settlement with the SEC and its declination with disgorgement with DOJ in 2019.[2]

Continue reading →

Recommendations for Combating Bribery of Foreign Officials

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine, Bruce E. Yannett, Ada Fernandez Johnson, and Katelyn McNelis

On November 26, 2021, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (the “OECD”) published revised anti-corruption guidelines, the Recommendation for Further Combating Bribery of Foreign Officials (the “2021 Recommendation”). These guidelines update the original recommendation from 2009 and significantly expand the expectations of member countries regarding anti-corruption enforcement.

Continue reading →

UK Introduces Magnitsky-Style Human Rights Sanctions Regime

by Karolos Seeger, Jane Shvets, Catherine Amirfar, Andrew M. Levine, Natalie L. Reid, David W. Rivkin, Alan Kartashkin, Konstantin Bureiko, and Martha Hirst

On 6 July 2020, the UK implemented a new sanctions regime targeting global human rights abuses, which allows the UK government to impose asset freezes and travel bans on persons it determines to have committed serious human rights violations. These restrictions have initially targeted 49 persons from Myanmar, Russia, Saudi Arabia and North Korea.

This is the first time since Brexit that the UK has diverged from EU sanctions policy. Although many of the targets and restrictions are broadly aligned with the “Magnitsky”-style sanctions previously implemented by the United States and Canada, the UK regime has some important differences. Companies operating in the UK will need to ensure that their sanctions systems and controls reflect this new regime.

Continue reading →

Safeguarding Corporate Compliance Programs During the COVID-19 Crisis

by Kara Brockmeyer, Andrew M. Levine and Philip Rohlik

COVID-19 has altered life for billions, including how companies interact with their employees, business partners, and regulators. Some changes will reverse as the pandemic ebbs or the virus becomes treatable. Others likely will remain for an extended period of time or even become permanent.

No matter the exact course of the coming months, disruptions from COVID-19 already have had a significant impact on corporate compliance functions, internal investigations, and government enforcement. These disruptions will continue to evolve, affecting companies in differing ways and leaving an unmistakable imprint on the compliance landscape. Continue reading →

Anti-Corruption Enforcement in Mexico:  A Possible Turning Point?

by Andrew M. Levine, Kara Brockmeyer, and Marisa R. Taney

In recent years, anti-corruption enforcement has become increasingly globalized.  New anti-corruption laws have proliferated, along with deepening commitments to enforcing such laws.  Sometimes, like in Brazil, active enforcement has followed promptly after the adoption of new laws.  Other times, as in the case of Mexico, the journey from enactment to enforcement has proven more challenging. 

Amidst much fanfare, Mexico adopted its new National Anti-Corruption System in mid-2016.  Many hoped Mexico would seize the opportunity and shortly thereafter pursue significant anti-corruption enforcement.  But key posts within the anti-corruption system remained unfilled, and no significant enforcement ensued. Continue reading →