《反海外腐败法》执行中的“拒绝与撤销”

Karen E. Woody
{"title":"《反海外腐败法》执行中的“拒绝与撤销”","authors":"Karen E. Woody","doi":"10.36646/mjlr.51.2.declinations","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article addresses the recent pretrial diversion scheme undertaken by the Department of Justice in conjunction with its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Pilot Program—specifically, “declinations with disgorgement.” Pursuant to the Pilot Program, the Department of Justice declined to prosecute or even continue an investigation, provided the company disgorge its alleged ill-gotten gains. This Article dissects both the purpose of, and terminology used in, declinations with disgorgement and argues that this novel and creative pretrial diversion is a dangerous conflation of legal remedial theories and terms. A criminal disposition cannot be a declination with attendant penalties because either illegal activity occurred or it did not; prosecutorial discretion does not allow an “in-between” option of declination while simultaneously requiring disgorgement. Calling these dispositions “declinations” and the penalties associated therewith “disgorgement” is a wild misuse of the terms, which creates a crisis in the expressive function of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and in the legal lexicon itself.","PeriodicalId":83420,"journal":{"name":"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School","volume":"35 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"Declinations with Disgorgement\\\" in FCPA Enforcement\",\"authors\":\"Karen E. Woody\",\"doi\":\"10.36646/mjlr.51.2.declinations\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This Article addresses the recent pretrial diversion scheme undertaken by the Department of Justice in conjunction with its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Pilot Program—specifically, “declinations with disgorgement.” Pursuant to the Pilot Program, the Department of Justice declined to prosecute or even continue an investigation, provided the company disgorge its alleged ill-gotten gains. This Article dissects both the purpose of, and terminology used in, declinations with disgorgement and argues that this novel and creative pretrial diversion is a dangerous conflation of legal remedial theories and terms. A criminal disposition cannot be a declination with attendant penalties because either illegal activity occurred or it did not; prosecutorial discretion does not allow an “in-between” option of declination while simultaneously requiring disgorgement. Calling these dispositions “declinations” and the penalties associated therewith “disgorgement” is a wild misuse of the terms, which creates a crisis in the expressive function of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and in the legal lexicon itself.\",\"PeriodicalId\":83420,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.51.2.declinations\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"University of Michigan journal of law reform. University of Michigan. Law School","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36646/mjlr.51.2.declinations","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文论述了司法部最近为配合其《反海外腐败法》试点项目而实施的审前分流计划——具体而言,即“撤销与追缴”。根据试点计划,司法部拒绝起诉,甚至拒绝继续调查,前提是该公司交出其所谓的不义之财。这篇文章剖析了拒诉的目的和术语,并认为这种新颖和创造性的审前转移是法律补救理论和术语的危险合并。刑事处分不能因为发生了非法活动或没有发生非法活动而予以拒绝并附带处罚;检察官的自由裁量权不允许在要求撤销起诉的同时有拒绝起诉的“中间”选择。将这些处置称为“拒绝”,并将与之相关的处罚称为“撤职”,是对这些术语的疯狂滥用,这给《反海外腐败法》的表达功能和法律词汇本身造成了危机。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
"Declinations with Disgorgement" in FCPA Enforcement
This Article addresses the recent pretrial diversion scheme undertaken by the Department of Justice in conjunction with its Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Pilot Program—specifically, “declinations with disgorgement.” Pursuant to the Pilot Program, the Department of Justice declined to prosecute or even continue an investigation, provided the company disgorge its alleged ill-gotten gains. This Article dissects both the purpose of, and terminology used in, declinations with disgorgement and argues that this novel and creative pretrial diversion is a dangerous conflation of legal remedial theories and terms. A criminal disposition cannot be a declination with attendant penalties because either illegal activity occurred or it did not; prosecutorial discretion does not allow an “in-between” option of declination while simultaneously requiring disgorgement. Calling these dispositions “declinations” and the penalties associated therewith “disgorgement” is a wild misuse of the terms, which creates a crisis in the expressive function of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and in the legal lexicon itself.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信