- Many corporations are operating in an era of global enforcement and increasing cooperation between regulators, which has significant implications for assessing risk as well as if and in what jurisdiction to make a voluntary disclosure.
- Although DPAs offer a mechanism to manage risk associated with criminal liability, the risk of downstream litigation arising from the underlying conduct, including in other jurisdictions, is not necessarily mitigated.
- DPAs shift the cost and burden associated with compliance to the corporations.
- Careful consideration must be given to the competing interpretations across jurisdictions of the scope of privilege that arises from an internal investigation and if it must be waived in order to obtain a DPA.
The second roundtable session focused on Qualifying for a DPA – Best practices in compliance program development and internal investigations and was moderated by Brian Whisler. The speakers discussed in detail how compliance programs and internal investigations can be effectively leveraged in negotiating a DPA. The speakers also offered best practices in managing employee-related risks associated with whistle-blowing and tips on creating a culture that encourages internal reporting. In addition, the speakers provided recommendations on what firms can do to adapt and update compliance programs, to ensure that they are “DPA-ready.”
- A strong internal compliance regime can serve as a valuable tool in negotiating a DPA, however there is very little prescriptive guidance as to what regulators will consider a sufficient internal compliance program.
- To prepare their compliance regime for DPAs in Canada and to avoid the appearance of a “paper compliance program” corporations should consider the depth of meaningful compliance mechanisms, including communication, training, auditing, reporting, disciplinary measures, the commitment and engagement of senior and mid-level management, third party due diligence, and periodic testing and review.
- Strategic consideration should be given to how to manage multijurisdictional data protection and data privacy regimes in the context of an internal investigation and/or voluntary disclosure.
- Managing reputational risk, in particular with a corporation’s regulator and the public, is a key consideration in assessing the drawbacks and benefits of voluntary self-disclosure.
The roundtable reflected the deep and diverse experience of the Firm, including those with experience with the UK’s Serious Fraud Office, the US Department of Justice, the Crown Attorney’s office, and the highest levels of the Canadian government. The Firm’s moderators and speakers included:
- Crystal Roberts Jezierski has 18 years of experience, including high-level government positions having served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs at the US Department of Justice and as Chief Counsel for Oversight and Investigations for the US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee.
- Brian Whisler is the chair of the DC Litigation and Government Enforcement Practice Group. Prior to joining Baker McKenzie, Brian served as the Criminal Chief Assistant US Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, Richmond, overseeing and prosecuting cases including from white collar crime and public corruption.
- Chris Burkett is a former Crown Attorney who has worked in the firm’s London office and conducted internal investigations of anti-corruption and human rights compliance issues for multinational corporations and their subsidiaries across many international jurisdictions. He has written and spoken widely on Deferred Prosecution Agreement regimes.
- Peter MacKay, the former Attorney General and Minister of Justice until November 2015. He helps lead the Toronto office’s Government Enforcement practice.
- Peter Tomczak who serves as a member of the Steering Committee of Baker McKenzie’s North America Litigation and Government Enforcement Practice Group, and the Chair of its Chicago Office Litigation and Government Enforcement Practice Group.
- Henry Garfield works in the firm’s London office specializing in business crimes. He previously completed a secondment at the UK’s Serious Fraud Office (the Government agency tasked with investigating and prosecuting serious fraud, bribery and corruption).
- Meredith Kaufman is a partner in the employment & compensation practice group. Meredith focuses on employment law disputes and has represented employers in all types of litigation throughout her career.