1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:03,320 Speaker 1: The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department are 2 00:00:03,360 --> 00:00:07,840 Speaker 1: investigating China Petroleum and Chemical over allegations at the state 3 00:00:07,920 --> 00:00:12,240 Speaker 1: controlled oil producer paid Nigerian officials about a one million 4 00:00:12,320 --> 00:00:15,880 Speaker 1: dollars in bribes to resolve a business dispute. According to 5 00:00:15,920 --> 00:00:19,520 Speaker 1: people familiar with the probe, the alleged payments by outside 6 00:00:19,600 --> 00:00:22,800 Speaker 1: lawyers acting as middlemen for the company known as sine Peck, 7 00:00:23,120 --> 00:00:26,279 Speaker 1: were intended to resolve a four billion dollar dispute between 8 00:00:26,320 --> 00:00:30,000 Speaker 1: the Chinese Oil Companies petroleum unit in Geneva and the 9 00:00:30,080 --> 00:00:35,159 Speaker 1: Nigerian government. Here to help us explain this probe are 10 00:00:35,280 --> 00:00:38,720 Speaker 1: Peter Henning, professor at Wayne State University Law School, and 11 00:00:38,840 --> 00:00:43,000 Speaker 1: Robert Hockett, professor at Cornell University Law School. Bob tell 12 00:00:43,120 --> 00:00:47,560 Speaker 1: us more about the allegations. All right, So the allegation 13 00:00:48,000 --> 00:00:53,479 Speaker 1: is that China Peck, through its ads, got into a 14 00:00:53,479 --> 00:00:57,240 Speaker 1: dispute with the Nigerian government over a financial deal that 15 00:00:57,360 --> 00:01:01,400 Speaker 1: was meant to be consummated over in Niger area. Um. 16 00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:05,240 Speaker 1: Ultimately this became more and more complicated. The litigation got 17 00:01:05,319 --> 00:01:07,280 Speaker 1: kind of harry or I should not litigation, but the 18 00:01:07,319 --> 00:01:13,040 Speaker 1: negotiation around possibilitation got sufficiently Harry UH that SINO picked 19 00:01:13,080 --> 00:01:15,320 Speaker 1: through a X decided sort of resolve the dispute with 20 00:01:15,360 --> 00:01:19,480 Speaker 1: the sort of side payment to the Nigerian government officials involved. 21 00:01:19,880 --> 00:01:23,160 Speaker 1: UM this particular, these payments were said are said to 22 00:01:23,160 --> 00:01:26,440 Speaker 1: have end are alleged to have been funneled through US 23 00:01:26,600 --> 00:01:28,920 Speaker 1: banks UH. And that's of course with the U S 24 00:01:29,000 --> 00:01:31,760 Speaker 1: juristiction sort of comes into into the story. Um. So 25 00:01:31,800 --> 00:01:35,960 Speaker 1: what we have now is the possibility of charges being 26 00:01:35,959 --> 00:01:40,000 Speaker 1: brought by the SEC, perhaps by the d J against 27 00:01:40,400 --> 00:01:46,800 Speaker 1: UM SINOPEC for essentially misusing UH its American bank accounts 28 00:01:47,120 --> 00:01:50,600 Speaker 1: in conducting these payments. That would have been violation or 29 00:01:51,040 --> 00:01:57,800 Speaker 1: Practices Act and violations of other nations statutes as well. Peter, 30 00:01:58,040 --> 00:02:00,600 Speaker 1: is it unusual for U S officials to be interested 31 00:02:00,600 --> 00:02:02,880 Speaker 1: in a transaction like this? So, so Bob did mention 32 00:02:02,880 --> 00:02:06,600 Speaker 1: the American banks and so that's a legal jurisdictional element there. 33 00:02:06,680 --> 00:02:08,520 Speaker 1: But you know, we're talking about stuff in Europe, were 34 00:02:08,520 --> 00:02:10,480 Speaker 1: talking about stuff in in Asia, We're talking about stuff 35 00:02:10,480 --> 00:02:12,720 Speaker 1: in Africa. It seems like most of the activity is 36 00:02:12,720 --> 00:02:16,280 Speaker 1: going on in places other than the US. Well, welcome 37 00:02:16,320 --> 00:02:19,800 Speaker 1: to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. It is, Uh, the 38 00:02:19,880 --> 00:02:24,200 Speaker 1: law is so broad that if there have been cases 39 00:02:24,240 --> 00:02:28,000 Speaker 1: in which emails were sent through Yahoo accounts, UH and 40 00:02:28,240 --> 00:02:31,080 Speaker 1: servers in Silicon Valley, and that was the basis for 41 00:02:31,160 --> 00:02:35,079 Speaker 1: the US to get involved. So it's not a surprise, 42 00:02:35,680 --> 00:02:39,680 Speaker 1: um in a sense the Justice Department in sec have 43 00:02:39,880 --> 00:02:44,960 Speaker 1: become something of the top cop for overseas bribery payments. 44 00:02:45,000 --> 00:02:47,720 Speaker 1: And of course, when you overlay this the fact that 45 00:02:47,800 --> 00:02:53,440 Speaker 1: Sinopeck is um a Chinese controlled oil company and the 46 00:02:53,560 --> 00:02:59,079 Speaker 1: US is raising issues about Chinese trade practices, you can 47 00:02:59,120 --> 00:03:01,799 Speaker 1: certainly see this says part of an effort to use 48 00:03:01,880 --> 00:03:06,560 Speaker 1: American laws to police Chinese company and potentially embarrass the 49 00:03:06,639 --> 00:03:11,079 Speaker 1: Chinese government. Bob, the Swiss had looked into this matter 50 00:03:11,320 --> 00:03:14,960 Speaker 1: and closed the book on it after a short inquiry. 51 00:03:15,080 --> 00:03:18,480 Speaker 1: They required sign a pack to pay thirty two million 52 00:03:18,520 --> 00:03:25,560 Speaker 1: dollars in damages after admitting to organizational deficiencies. So is 53 00:03:25,560 --> 00:03:28,200 Speaker 1: it is it? Should that have been the end of it? 54 00:03:28,320 --> 00:03:32,720 Speaker 1: Is the US going a little too far in pursuing 55 00:03:32,720 --> 00:03:36,040 Speaker 1: it further? Well, it sort of depends. I mean, Peter 56 00:03:36,160 --> 00:03:39,440 Speaker 1: is exactly right that the Foreign Practices Act, which I 57 00:03:39,520 --> 00:03:43,600 Speaker 1: also mentioned before, you know, affords a great abroad sort 58 00:03:43,600 --> 00:03:47,320 Speaker 1: of jurisdiction, Right, to US authorities. Um, Basically, they can 59 00:03:47,360 --> 00:03:51,720 Speaker 1: exercise jurisdiction anytime some American institution or firm has been 60 00:03:51,840 --> 00:03:55,400 Speaker 1: used in the perpetration of some active corruption. Um. The 61 00:03:55,520 --> 00:03:58,440 Speaker 1: reasons I mean, the fact that we're able to do that, 62 00:03:58,560 --> 00:04:01,160 Speaker 1: of course, is one thing. Whether we would want to 63 00:04:01,200 --> 00:04:03,800 Speaker 1: do that or want to act on that jurisdiction is another, 64 00:04:04,120 --> 00:04:06,160 Speaker 1: And that raises the questionable why would we want to? 65 00:04:06,520 --> 00:04:08,880 Speaker 1: Peter identified one reason? Right, we are engaged in the 66 00:04:08,960 --> 00:04:11,880 Speaker 1: kind of across the board sort of trade a competition 67 00:04:11,920 --> 00:04:14,600 Speaker 1: with China, and there is some concern about Chinese business 68 00:04:14,600 --> 00:04:17,120 Speaker 1: practices more broadly. The other thing may be worth noting 69 00:04:17,120 --> 00:04:20,359 Speaker 1: in this connection, though, is that US companies are routinely 70 00:04:20,440 --> 00:04:23,680 Speaker 1: prosecuted under the Foreign corupt Practices acting are held to 71 00:04:23,720 --> 00:04:28,440 Speaker 1: a pretty high standard by American law enforcement agencies, and 72 00:04:28,480 --> 00:04:32,440 Speaker 1: so if they didn't do likewise with respect to foreign companies, 73 00:04:32,760 --> 00:04:35,760 Speaker 1: that might in effect give foreign companies and advantage over 74 00:04:35,920 --> 00:04:38,240 Speaker 1: American companies, right, they would be an effect subject to 75 00:04:38,360 --> 00:04:41,680 Speaker 1: less to more lacks regulation. So my guess is that 76 00:04:41,680 --> 00:04:43,479 Speaker 1: that might be playing a role here as well, that 77 00:04:43,720 --> 00:04:47,320 Speaker 1: basically we don't want to be sort of treating our 78 00:04:47,360 --> 00:04:50,400 Speaker 1: own firms more harshly than we treat foreign firms if 79 00:04:50,400 --> 00:04:52,200 Speaker 1: they're violating the same laws.