Thursday, February 25, 2021
Corporate Compliance Insights
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Articles
    • See All Articles
    • NEW: COVID-Related
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Leadership and Career
  • Vendor News
  • Jobs
    • Compliance & Risk
    • Information Security
  • Events
    • Webinars & Events
    • Submit an Event
  • Downloads
    • eBooks
    • Whitepapers
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About
    • About CCI
    • Writing for CCI
    • NEW: CCI Press – Book Publishing
    • Advertise With Us
  • Articles
    • See All Articles
    • NEW: COVID-Related
    • Compliance
    • Ethics
    • Risk
    • FCPA
    • Governance
    • Fraud
    • Internal Audit
    • HR Compliance
    • Cybersecurity
    • Data Privacy
    • Financial Services
    • Leadership and Career
  • Vendor News
  • Jobs
    • Compliance & Risk
    • Information Security
  • Events
    • Webinars & Events
    • Submit an Event
  • Downloads
    • eBooks
    • Whitepapers
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Subscribe
No Result
View All Result
Corporate Compliance Insights
Home Compliance

Bribery of Foreign Officials

by Wendy Wysong
December 21, 2016
in Compliance
developments to anti-bribery regulations in japan

with contributing authors Michelle Mizutani and Shunsuke Nagae

The handful of foreign official bribery prosecutions in Japan have not satisfied the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (the OECD), which renewed its pleas for the country to prioritise its battle against international bribery in June 2016. This article examines Japan’s responses to the OECD’s demands, the latest developments in Japan’s foreign official bribery laws and the implications for Japanese multinational corporations and foreign companies with potential exposure to the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (the UCPA).

Prevention of Foreign Official Bribery – Japan

After Japan’s accession to the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, Japan amended the UCPA in 1998 (effective February 1999) to create the offence of foreign official bribery.

Article 18 of the UCPA provides that it is illegal to give, offer or promise bribes to non-Japanese public officials. The UCPA only penalises the giver of the bribe, not the recipient. Japanese nationals are liable for bribing foreign public officials inside or outside of Japan. A non-Japanese individual may be punished if any part of the bribe is committed in Japan.

When a representative, agent or employee of a company violates the UCPA in relation to a company’s business, the company itself may also be punished. Japanese law will presume that the company was negligent in its selection and oversight of such representative, agent or employee and in preventing such person from committing illegal acts.  In order to escape liability, the company must prove that it had exercised the due care necessary to prevent the violation.

It is important to note that a non-Japanese company could be prosecuted if its representative, agent or employee bribes (in relation to the company’s business) a foreign public official (i.e., a non-Japanese public official) or commits part of such a bribe whilst in Japan.  Moreover, a non-Japanese company could also face liability if any of its Japanese national representatives, agents or employees bribe (in relation to the company’s business) a foreign public official, inside or outside of Japan.

The maximum penalty for an offence is: (i) for natural persons, five years’ imprisonment and/or a fine of JPY5 million; and (ii) for companies, a fine of JPY300 million.

Repeated Exhortations from the OECD & Japan’s Response

Heeding the OECD’s pleas to intensify its measures to combat foreign official bribery, Japan established, in April 2014, an action plan to create resources in certain prosecutor and police offices to detect and investigate foreign official bribery by Japanese companies. Effective October 2016, Japan’s anti-money laundering laws were amended to strengthen reporting obligations of specific business operators, defined broadly, in relation to suspicious transactions.

In July 2015, the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), which administers the UCPA, revised its Guidelines for the Prevention of Bribery of Foreign Public Officials (the 2015 METI Guidelines). The 2015 METI Guidelines describes the procedures commercial organisations should put in place to prevent associated persons from bribing.

Despite the repeated OECD exhortations, only four cases of foreign bribery have been prosecuted in Japan since 1999.

Implications for Japanese Corporations and Foreign Companies

Given the repeated pressure from the OECD, it would not be surprising to see Japan begin prosecuting more foreign bribery cases.

Accordingly, it is important for Japanese companies and foreign companies with potential exposure to the UCPA to take steps to prevent incidences of bribery by their representatives, agents and employees.

The 2015 METI Guidelines provide illustrative steps a company should take to prevent bribery and concluded that for a company to be discharged of liability for the acts of its representatives, agents and employees, the steps it takes must be in the form of proactive and specific instruction.  The  METI Guidelines note that it is important to keep in mind the importance of the attitude and message from top management, to take a risk-based approach and to ensure that effective preventative systems are not only well-structured, but also well-operated and evaluated at appropriate frequency. The methods addressed include:

  • The formulation and announcement of anti-bribery policies and internal rules governing high-risk business activities (e.g., the provision of entertainment, appointment of agents/consultants, engaging in projects that foster close contact with officials, selection of joint venture partners etc.) and employee sanctions for engaging in bribery;
  • The development of organisational frameworks (e.g., the appointment of a compliance officer, establishment of hotlines and a system to follow up suspicions/concerns);
  • The implementation of educational activities in the company;
  • Regular and irregular audits to assess whether preventative systems are functioning;
  • Evaluation and review of the effectiveness of the preventative systems based on the results of regular audits.

Although the 2015 METI Guidelines primarily deal with Japanese companies seeking to expand overseas, it is still a useful reference for other companies which also face potential liability under the UCPA.


Previous Post

The Quest for Internal Audit Talent as Stakeholders Expect More

Next Post

Setting the 2017 Audit Committee Agenda

Wendy Wysong

Wendy L. Wysong is a partner at Steptoe & Johnson. She served previously as a litigation partner with Clifford Chance, offering clients advice and representation on compliance and enforcement under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the Arms Export Control Act, International Traffic in Arms Regulations, Export Administration Regulations, and OFAC Economic Sanctions. She was appointed by the State Department as the ITAR Special Compliance Official for Xe Services (formerly Blackwater) in 2010. Wendy combines her experience as a former federal prosecutor with the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia for 16 years with her regulatory background as the former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement at the Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce. She managed its enforcement program and was involved in the development and implementation of foreign policy through export controls across the administration, including the Departments of Justice, State, Treasury and Homeland Security, as well as the intelligence community. Wendy received her law degree in 1984 from the University of Virginia School of Law, where she was a member of the University of Virginia Law Review.

Related Posts

illustration of hand holding flashlight illuminating hidden stairs

The Corporate Transparency Act: Pulling Back the Veil

February 23, 2021
King & Spalding: GC Decision Tree for Internal Investigations

King & Spalding: GC Decision Tree for Internal Investigations

February 19, 2021
mini businessmen separated by COVID particles

Compliance, Culture and COVID

February 9, 2021
closeup of gear shift with red face

Preparing for the Inevitable Regulatory Policy Shifts in Q1 2021

January 29, 2021
Next Post
Setting the 2017 Audit Committee Agenda

Setting the 2017 Audit Committee Agenda

Access realtime data
Addressing systemic racism in the workplace SAI Global
Dynamic Risk Assessments with Workiva
Top 10 Risk and Compliance Trends

Special Coverage

Special COVID page graphic

Jump to a Topic:

anti-corruption anti-money laundering/AML Artificial Intelligence/A.I. automation banks board of directors board risk oversight bribery CCPA/California Consumer Privacy Act Cloud Compliance communications management Coronavirus/COVID-19 corporate culture crisis management cyber crime cyber risk data analytics data breach data governance decision-making diversity DOJ due diligence fcpa enforcement actions financial crime GDPR GRC HIPAA information security KYC/know your customer machine learning monitoring ransomware regtech reputation risk risk assessment Sanctions SEC social media risk supply chain technology third party risk management tone at the top training whistleblowing
No Result
View All Result

Privacy Policy

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS Feed

Category

  • CCI Press
  • Compliance
  • Compliance Podcasts
  • Cybersecurity
  • Data Privacy
  • eBooks
  • Ethics
  • FCPA
  • Featured
  • Financial Services
  • Fraud
  • Governance
  • GRC Vendor News
  • HR Compliance
  • Internal Audit
  • Leadership and Career
  • Opinion
  • Resource Library
  • Risk
  • Uncategorized
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • Whitepapers

© 2019 Corporate Compliance Insights

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About
  • Articles
  • Vendor News
  • Podcasts
  • Videos
  • Whitepapers
  • eBooks
  • Events
  • Jobs
  • Subscribe

© 2019 Corporate Compliance Insights