Trump administration shrugs off International Corruption  

What will happen after the suspension of the FCPA? The international network of law firms InLaw Alliance convened an interesting webinar to analyze the global consequences of the at least momentary withdrawal of the US from the fight against international corruption, and the regulatory vacuum it leaves behind.

The suspension of the US rule against foreign corrupt practices (FCPA) last February 10 leaves the world "orphaned of that global supercommissioner that was the US Department of Justice," according to Felipe García, managing partner of Círculo Legal.

"The Trump Administration renounces to lead the surveillance of international corruption", has assured Diego Cabezuela, president of InLaw Alliance and senior partner of Círculo Legal, having ordered the suspension, for the time being, temporary, of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) , ordering to paralyze, for now the investigations, and even opening the door to review the sanctions imposed in the past, in application of this law.

The decision, articulated through an executive order by President Trump, limits the action of federal prosecutors and conditions any procedure to the express authorization of the Attorney General. According to the text itself, the application of the FCPA would be "hindering the strategic and commercial interests of the United States", which has set off alarm bells in the international legal community and international bodies engaged in the fight for transparency, such as the OECD.

To address the consequences of this suspension, InLaw Alliance and Latin American Quality Institute (LAQI) convened a high-level technical webinar last Thursday.

The session, entitled "FAREWELL WITH THE FCPA, USA ABANDONS THE FIGHT AGAINST INTERNATIONAL BRIBERY", brought together leading experts in compliance and economic criminal law, who analyzed the future of the fight against international bribery, without the support of what until now had been its main standard-bearer: the United States.

Daniel Maximilian Da Costa, president of LAQI, opened the meeting with a call to action: "When some move backwards, others must move forward". He added: "We cannot afford to lower the ethical standard. Integrity is not an accessory: it is the linchpin." "The international legal community went into shock."

Diego Cabezuela contextualized, in his presentation, the seriousness of the situation: "The international legal community went into shock, when the Trump administration put the FCPA on hold". The lawyer recalled that this law, born in 1977, after the Watergate scandal, turned the US into "a kind of global gendarme against corruption", and that it was key in the creation and dissemination of the criminal liability of legal persons.

"The progress in recent decades, in the fight against international corruption had been difficult, but remarkable," he warned, to, then, launch several questions to the debate: "Is the United States going to definitely lower its arms in the fight against international bribery? Has the time really come for the West to have to go ahead in this, alone, without the United States?"

Alonso: "Trump has said: "Enough""

Former U.S. Department of Justice federal prosecutor Daniel R. Alonso, an expert in internal investigations and anti-corruption, gave a detailed presentation on the history and scope of the FCPA. "The United States has been the leader in international enforcement until February of this year," he said. "Trump has said enough is enough, or at least a 180-day pause, probably a year."

Alonso explained that all investigations must now be personally authorized by the Attorney General, and that priority has been given to cases related to cartels and organized crime, excluding those focused solely on corrupt practices in public tenders or contracts. "This is not going to support a robust FCPA program," he lamented.

Still, he warned, "You should not give up on anti-corruption compliance. The statute of limitations is five years and Trump’s term is four. Another administration may come along with very different policies."

In his speech, Alonso presented a chart with the ten largest cases sanctioned under the FCPA, including such well-known names as Odebrecht (Brazil, 2016), sanctioned with US$3.56 billion; Goldman Sachs (USA, 2020), with US$3.3 billion; and Airbus (Netherlands/France, 2020), with US$2.09 billion.

Also highlighted were the cases of Petrobras (2018), Telia Company AB (Sweden, 2017), Siemens (Germany, 2008), Alstom (France, 2014), VimpelCom (Netherlands, 2016), TechnipFMC (France/UK, 2019) and the most recent on the list: Telefónica Venezolana (Spain, 2024), with a penalty of US$85 million. Alonso emphasized that, of all these cases, only one company is American, reflecting the powerful extraterritoriality of FCPA enforcement.