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
 

The entire GSK investigation, led by the Economic Crimes Investigation Bureau under the Ministry of Public Security, could wrap up by the end of this year at the earliest, but that there are still disagreements over whether GSK will be charged for corporate bribery or whether only its executives in China should be charged.  A professor at the People’s Public Security University of China who specialises in economic crimes investigations said recently in Shanghai at a closed-door meeting that the risk of GSK being charged as a legal entity cannot be ruled out, three people who attended the meeting told PaRR. GSK’s management, whether Chinese or foreign nationals, could therefore face charges in the case, the three people said.



Click to read more...
Tweet Like Email LinkedIn

On December 3, 2013, Transparency International released 2013 Corruption Perceptions Index about the perceived levels of public sector corruption in 177 countries/territories around the world. 

Denmark and New Zealand, scored 91, are ranked No. 1 in integrity.  The bottom countries are Afghanistan, North Korea and Somania, which are all scored 8 and ranked at 175.  China and Greece, scored 40, are ranked at 80.  China was ranked at 80 as well in 2012.



Click to read more...
Tweet Like Email LinkedIn
It has been typical under PRC law for bribe takers to be punished more severely than bribe givers. The policy was to punish extortion and incentivize cooperation with government investigations. But as recent investigations into the sales practices of big pharmaceutical companies have shown, this policy may be changing.

Click to read more...
Tweet Like Email LinkedIn

Three international organizations just released the Anti-Corruption Ethics and Compliance Handbook for Business.  The three organizations include the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) and the World Bank.  Hereinafter is the self-explanatory message from the OECD, the UNODC and the World Bank.



Click to read more...
Tweet Like Email LinkedIn

If a local manager in China pays bribes and is liable under the law, could his or her supervising executives in the U.S. or Europe also be held criminally responsible? Or should they shrug off the possible liabilities by claiming “the mountain is high, the emperor is far away?”

China law imposes responsibility for crimes committed by business “units” (such as bribery) on a couple of categories of individuals -- “the responsible persons who are directly in charge” (直接负责的主管人员) and “the other persons who are directly responsible” (其他直接责任人员).



Click to read more...
Tweet Like Email LinkedIn

China's antitrust watchdog, the National Development and Reform Commission, has launched an investigation into Qualcomm.  The NDRC is keeping its investigation confidential right now but is examining the company through the lens of the country's anti-monopoly law, Qualcomm said on Monday November 25, 2013. Since details on the investigation are confidential, there's no telling at the moment what the country could be looking at with Qualcomm.

 



Click to read more...
Tweet Like Email LinkedIn

The lawyer did not tell them “yes or no” regarding legality.  He instead proposed that Roadway change the title of their purchase contracts from “Contract for Purchasing Information and Data” to “Contract on the Advice and Consultation for Commercial Data,” as though that would in some way help. In light of the lawyer’s advice, Roadway continued purchasing the private data and that decision became “perfect incriminating evidence to prove that Roadway and the other four accused individuals intentionally committed the crime of breaching privacy.”



Click to read more...
Tweet Like Email LinkedIn

According to Mr. LU Yanchun, a Deputy Director of the Price Supervision and Anti-Monopoly Bureau of the National Development and Reform Commission (the “NDRC”), the NDRC is going to tighten up the law enforcement in the industries of aviation (presumably retailing services), everyday chemicals, automobiles, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals, and household electric appliances. 



Click to read more...
Tweet Like Email LinkedIn
PAGE TOTAL 87
9
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