Abstract
Deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) provide an alternative enforcement tool to tackle economic crime. Prosecutors tailor punishment and remediation measures more accurately to satisfy the principles of prosecution. The companies in question can avoid criminal charges, provided that they comply with agreed terms and conditions. The use of DPAs is conducive to relieving collateral consequences, while being able to deter, punish and reshape corporate behaviour. In principle, enforcement authorities can maximise the leverage with criminal liability over companies to cultivate a robust corporate culture against bribery. It is argued that an effective global anti-bribery regime rests with not only transnational cooperation, but also adequate governance and rigorous compliance. With the DPAs having increased in prominence as a mainstay of the US enforcement regime, it remains to be seen whether the potent tool will be viable and further reshape the future enforcement landscape of the anti-bribery regime in the UK and even on a global basis.
Highlights
Bribery represents a serious impediment to multinational companies (MNCs)’ governance integrity and fair competition in the global market.1 An eruption of highprofile scandals has triggered anti-bribery enforcement agencies to strengthen their123Vol.:(0123456789)Q
For the sake of saving precious juridical resources on the one hand, and attenuating adverse collateral effects arising from criminal liability on the other, the UK introduced a framework of deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) through the Crime and Courts Act 2013.5 With the Deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) being effective from 24 February 2014, the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPPs) have the power to offer and enter into DPAs subject to the court’s approval
Given that the use of DPAs reflects a shift towards a more US-style approach, the paper examines whether the distinct UK-based DPAs will represent an effective alternative to corporate criminal enforcement
Summary
Bribery represents a serious impediment to multinational companies (MNCs)’ governance integrity and fair competition in the global market. An eruption of highprofile scandals has triggered anti-bribery enforcement agencies to strengthen their. Corporations can avoid the stigma of a criminal conviction and the collateral consequences that a prosecution may bring, but are still effectively punished for their crimes.. Given that the use of DPAs reflects a shift towards a more US-style approach, the paper examines whether the distinct UK-based DPAs will represent an effective alternative to corporate criminal enforcement.. This part analyses whether a single global settlement via DPAs is viable and considers how to cater for trans-jurisdictional matters and to level the international playing field.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
