Notes about cooperation and complaints in the US Judicial System | Alberto Islav Article

Alberto Islas

I participated in five transnational contradictions in which companies participated in accordance with the jurisdiction of the United States for actions committed in Mexico. In 1977, it was legitimate that the companies regulated in the United States could be authorized if they commit corruption acts abroad, which is known as the Law on Foreign Corruptions (FCPA). Nevertheless, only in the nineties, when many Mexican companies decided to place capital in the US markets, which adhered to their regulation of the transparency of accounting, the advanced practice of society and corporate governance rules.

The absence of personnel in the judiciary in Mexico trained to attend financial and slow trials in the field of regulatory authorities caused a decision of economic and financial trials in the United States. An example is commercial competitions where Mexican companies are structured in the US Cortes. In turn, there is a very reliable infrastructure to evaluate losses and be able to manage monetary repairs for the victim. This infrastructure consists of independent experts who provide evidence to the court, so that frivolous or meaningless requirements deviate.

In this delivery, I will talk about two cases that are publicly available and can be consulted in the judicial and regulatory systems of the SEC. This is in order to determine the problems and obstacles that the German Gomez, Carmen Aristugui, Kate del Castillo or any person mentioned in #televisaleks, who is looking for a repair of damage, or an investor who believes that this likely corporate action influenced the value of their heritage.

The first case refers to the supermarket store, which is located on the US stock exchange and is regulated by the Sec. This company had the usual growth in Mexico for three years in a row. Officials responsible for the region in Mexico and the USA received the highest bonds in history for this growth, which created an internal dispute about other vice presidents and claims to the internal controller, which initiated an internal investigation. The investigation must answer the following; This expansion was legally carried out and in accordance with the leading principles of the company.

Internal research courage, in Mexico, in the field of corporate development, was the region of a lawyer who managed local licenses, such as construction permits, local licenses, health inspections, payment of property, termination of work and aspects of urban planning. In this area, despite the fact that legal issues did not report the general lawyer of the company, she had an autonomous budget and did not pay licenses to the authorities directly. This was enough to determine that there may be unjustified payments to accelerate procedures.

The supermarket company was supposed to warn the SEC (the Securities Exchange Commission) that it is very likely that it would violate the law on the fight against corruption; However, since a citizen of Mexico was a responsible person, he could not do anything, and this issue will be resolved by completing their labor relations. SEC, not satisfied with the reaction of the supermarket chain, I strive to interview the former employee, who we will call Jorge.

Jorge was unemployed and just got a quote to appear in PGR, where the SEC and FBI agent interviewed him. Given this, a strategy was developed when Jorge only showed that he was liquidated in accordance with the law, and that his dismissal was reduced budget. It was argued that if he had committed a crime, settlement would not continue for more than 15 years.

The Federal Prosecutor’s Office, which changed the agenda, commented that Horhe’s testimony was correct. The next day, the embassy was agreed on a meeting where the FBI reported that we can demonstrate that the payments and Modus Operandi process to facilitate the opening of the store was registered in the corporate policy of the company. That is, there was a budget, there were corporate guidance principles in which managers contracts with contracts were the results, the Director General of Corporate and Legal issues pushed payments to managers through the supplier system, and the most pressing thing was checked by an independent office.

After a thorough study of this information, for three months, the FBI came to the conclusion that the quality of the tests presented was true, accurate and convincing. The FBI determined that the only employee was not to those who violated the law, but that it was a corporate policy of Mexico’s subsidiary to get economic benefits. This radically changed the unforeseen circumstances for the supermarket company.

Although Jorge was not an American citizen, and his testimony would help to create more just corrections. The Ministry of Justice determined the following:

• • The company was supposed to pay legal expenses and investigations by Horge in Mexico and the USA – since they did not conduct an accurate investigation.
  • The company was not able to initiate trials to which jurisdiction against Jorge.
  • The Ministry of Justice helped Jorge visit a judge in the United States and make several days for a file for several days.
  • A letter was delivered where Jorge was released from any guilt, since he, as an employee, followed corporate policy.

A very important conclusion was to establish that the illegal actions of the company would be carried out with the participation of or without Jorge. To fulfill the corporate mission, there was a reverse opera, and this process had a budget that was never authorized by a controller, an internal or external auditor.

As a result, the entire directive of the supermarket company was gradually deleted, managers returned bonds. The company was filed with the court for investors, and she had to register a position in the amount of $ 650 million as compensation, lawyers, researchers and professional fees.

Not a single official from the apartment of supermarkets in prison, and the damage to shareholders was repaired since they did not approve, and did not know about this episode. In Mexico, the article from Nyt 2012 describes the process by which the company’s managers paid local authorities for creating stores in strategic places, despite the lack of necessary urbanization plans. Several members of the board of directors were resigned from the company.

The second case concerns the housing developer, who was accused of accounting in the United States. This provincial company had an exponential increase in sales from high demand for housing. The company that lacks internal control and large losses in the development of houses led to the fact that the delivery time of housing was not wrong and with the overspending of funds. Instead of stopping and reviewing its business model, the company increased its credit lines and justify higher loans of sales inventions of more than 100,000 houses. In total, the company records fictitious sales for more than $ 3.3 billion, which was reported in NYSE.

This company announced bankruptcy, and a group of new shareholders introduced resources for obtaining a company afloat. New shareholders did not know this fraud and, cooperating with the SEC transparently, they managed to not have economic sanctions. SEC fined the general director, COO, financial director and legal director.

The Schütte & Delsol office must very carefully create its own strategy, because if they seek to perform legal actions in the United States, they must demonstrate that the actions that were performed in television will be part of a corporate strategy; with the budget; that these elements were checked by the company’s internal control systems; And this is regardless of the role of Herman Gomez, they would be fulfilled.

The strategic error from my point of view Televisa did not initiate an internal investigation and transfers it to the investor. Since this fact did not recognize and denied the facts. It is clear that the company would not want to repeat the exclusive Aristegui NewsBut trust in Carmen Aristugui, approved by international awards, is that in any dispute it will weigh in order to determine the measure of repairs.

If consultants do not show any concern, it can also be a lawsuit and can affect insurance, so as not to cover their legal expenses, in case of their availability. In turn, it is worth noting that no company official can get a sanction, even economical. Being a lack of internal control – an area that arbitrarily used the budget – the company would have to carry out damage repairs, affecting shareholders, but not officials.

Trust in the report will not be doubted by the United States, since both Carmen Aristogi and Porfirio Patiño were awarded the most prestigious rewards in the guild. The placement of the report under consideration would be similar to doubt about the authority of Maria Mours Cabot, Peabody Award and Emmys. The most feasible result is that there is an economic correction for those who are affected by rational expectation, after several months of verification of evidence, when the participants will have to refrain from the trial in the media.

Alberto Islas, Global General Director Holding Solutions