User Name:     Password:        Join Us
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
▪ China is to award whistleblowers heavily – foreign companies are more vulnerable t
▪ 130 Chinese headhunters arrested, involving breach of 200 million pieces of person
▪ Corporate Compliance Programs Evaluation Issued by US DOJ (Chinese Translation)
▪ The prospect is promising to commercialize Level-3 autonomous driving in China
▪ Intelligent and digital infrastructures are scheduled to accompany automatic vehic
▪ Will China illegalize VIEs?
▪ You cannot miss the gold rush under China's new Foreign Investment Law
▪ Data must stay in China to get classified protection under Cyber Security Law
▪ China is to fast-track law-making in autonomous driving
▪ What compliance obligations to meet to transfer data from within China?
▪ Chinese government uses digital forensics technology to dig bribery evidence
▪ A Chinese medical device distributor fined CNY 50,000 for bribing with Moutai
▪ How would Chinese E-commerce Law affect you (1)?
▪ Conflict between the culture and the Party’s rules: $70 gift money got a director
▪ "Excessive Pricing" from perspective of Competition Law
▪ Does China prohibit cross-border transfer of scientific data?
▪ Hypermarket Caesar jailed for ten years for giving “reward for go-between”
▪ How is environmental protection tax collected in China?
▪ China Redefined Bribery Anticompetitive in Nature
▪ China is to amend its Constitution
▪ Chinese government vowed to crack down on bribe givers more harshly
▪ China has its own Dodd-Frank; the award for whistleblower could be US$ 80K
▪ Chinese government may LIUZHI a suspect of wrongdoing
▪ Cooking clinical trial data is rampant and now criminally punishable in China
▪ 5th Viadrina Compliance Congress
▪ Does a compliance bird eat nothing?
▪ How Are Drugs Being Sold in China Despite the Anti-Corruption Crusading
▪ Chinese whistle-blower lauded while French boss fled out of China
▪ Life Sentence for Deputy Chief Justice of China
▪ Why Is Chinese Anti-bribery Law a Very Important Compliance Obligation?
▪ The Report on Corporate Compliance Management in China (2016)
▪ Use of "predictive coding" in eDiscovery document review…best friend or job replac
▪ Civil Fraud v. Criminal Fraud: Criminal Proceedings Not a Silver Bullet to Resolve
▪ Corrupt Chinese drug administrators jailed or executed, whose family members ended
▪ Tone from the middle cannot be ignored
▪ Is bribing a Chinese doctor bribing an FCPA governmental official?
▪ Criminal and Administrative Liability under China's Competition Laws
▪ Model Standards for Trade Association Compliance with China's AML
▪ Double Exposure to Legal Risk Under China's Competition Laws: Comments Upon the Ex
▪ New Privacy Standards for New Data
▪ Chinese Police Are Foxhunting Corrupt Officials
▪ Transfer of Personal Data Overseas from Singapore: Recent Enhanced Provisions
▪ New Guidance on Antitrust Notifications in China
▪ China Issued the Standards on the Quality Management of Using Medical Devices (Dra
▪ China Imposes Harsher Liabilities for Environmental Non-Compliance
▪ GSK Faces Two Corruption Fights in East and West
▪ European Court of Justice Abrogates Data Retention and Allows Data Detention
▪ China Is to Adopt Risk-based Supervisory Rules on Medical Devices
▪ China to Set Food & Drug Police
▪ Don't Put All Medical Eggs into One Blacklisted Basket
 
Home > Compliance
Does a compliance bird eat nothing?

On April 17, 2017 Monday, we hosted a closed-door workshop on the subject of management of risk on outbound and inbound bribery as well as some other internal frauds such as embezzlement, conflict of interest, etc.  The participants include compliance officers and professionals, a senior official from the Investigation Squad of Shanghai Administration for Industry and Commerce, and a senior police officer.

 

For the purpose of the discussion, outbound bribery is categorized as compliance bribery while inbound bribery is categorized as fraud risk.  Some other items that are categorized as fraud risk include, embezzlement, conflict of interest, self-dealing and the like.

 

The workshop witnessed an in-depth discussion on the following questions:

 

1.        Would an FCPA investigation result in a domestic administrative or criminal investigation within China?

2.        Anticompetitive bribery v. corruptive bribery: where and how to draw a line apropos the regulatory and the management perspective?

3.        Is it true that a compliance bird eats nothing? If not, why not; if yes, how to cope with it?

4.        How to market effectively with institutional clients (especially SOEs or State-owned hospitals) keeping in compliance with the law?

5.        If your competitor violates anti-bribery law, would you blow the whistle on it before the governmental agencies?

6.        How to have trainings effectively? And what are the other key measures to manage the compliance risks?

7.        How do you view the risk of fraud (inbound bribery, conflict of interest, embezzlement, etc.) in your industry? Is it more rampant in comparison to the risk of compliance?

8.        How to effectively detect fraud risks, considering the risk of fraud is difficult to detect?

9.        Would you leverage the police investigations to go after internal fraudsters? If so, how?

10.     Should the police tear up a company and mess it up when investigating an internal fraudster?

 

For the 10 questions, the meeting lasted more than three hours.  For some questions, there are no clear answers, for example, how to deal with the dilemma that a compliance bird eats nothing.  It seems to be a phenomenon that multinational companies would give up some business opportunities to make sure there is no violation or non-compliance of anti-bribery law, but there is a lot to do to make their businesses less under-competitive or more promising, about which you may also read the Report on Corporate Compliance Management in China (2016).


*The author Henry Chen, a Senior Partner of Dentons Shanghai Office, is licensed to practice law in China and the New York State of the U.S.  Before joining Dentons, Henry worked in Ford as its AP Compliance Director.  Henry Chen is a representative of China Delegation to negotiate over ISO19600 Compliance Management System - Guidelines, and the Vice Director of the Working Committee on China national standard Compliance Management System.  Henry Chen is the author of the book Commercial Bribery Risk Management in China.  You may also visit Henry's column "Competition & Monopoly" maintained with Caixin Media.  Henry is available at henry.chen@dentons.cn


Tweet Like Email LinkedIn
There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
    Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author:   
Email:    (optional)
URL:    (optional)
Content:  
Code: *
    
  Comment Moderation Enabled
Your comment will not appear until it has been cleared by a website editor.
The Compliance Reviews COPYRIGHT © 2013-19 All Rights Reserved. Supported by International Risk and Compliance Association and International Risk and Compliance Institute Limited. 沪ICP备10034943号-8

31010502002477