The stage is set for laundry sink in the Oslo District Court when four former Yara tops Monday to defend itself against accusations of gross corruption.
Økokrim believes to prove that former CEO Thorleif Enger and three former corporate executives have vouched for agreements to pay millions in bribes to senior officials in Libya and India. But all four refuses guilt.
– The indictment comes very rough conditions, because there is talk of bribes to senior officials, it is about very large amounts, and because we believe to be able to prove that the decisions to use bribery is rooted in top management in Yara, says chief public prosecutor Marianne Djupesland in Økokrim.
We believe we could prove that the decisions to take bribes is rooted in top management in Yara. First Prosecutor Marianne Djupesland in Economic Crime
Economic Crime started investigation in 2011, and has devoted huge resources to get to the bottom of the case, which has already led to Yara in January adopted Norway’s largest ever corporate fine 270 million and confiscation of 25 million of gross corruption. But Økokrim believes the investigation has revealed that also four of its former managers, including former CEO Thorleif Enger, can be held personally responsible for the corruption took place.
Unique that peaks prosecuted
Three months is dedicated to the matter in Oslo District Court. Nearly 60 witnesses from a number of countries is called. Several of them to testify via video link from Switzerland, USA and India.
– The case is special also because we have had to gather information from many different countries to put together this puzzle and we have approached us to 12 different countries in Europe and beyond for help, says Djupesland.
Corruption Expert Petter Gotschalk BI agree with Djupesland in that case is serious and special.
– That one in the indictment yesterday after peaks in the company, with the former CEO at the helm, is unique. Very often in cases of economic crime is pointed out people a little further down in the organization. In those cases one has gone after peaks, they have mostly also been owners of the company. I can not remember what happened before that employees CEOs have been prosecuted, he said.
Will probably max two years
The seriousness notwithstanding, he does not believe that the four earlier summits risk long prison sentences. He has previously discussed the company’s record-high bot as “too low”, and stressed that the amounts matter concerns are relatively low compared with other similar cases.
The four former Yara peaks is accused of having agreed to pay five million US dollars to the son of Libya’s former oil minister, which $ 1.5 million was paid (see fact box). In India went out agreement to pay three million US dollars to the son of a senior bureaucrat in the country’s chemical and fertilizer ministry. Here was $ 1 million paid out.
Vimpelcom is to comparison accused of having paid out over a half billion President’s daughter in Uzbekistan.
– The amount is interesting, because it is primarily this that determines imprisonment in such cases in Norway, says Gotschalk.
He has recorded all judgments in “white collar” -saker in Norway over the past eight years and find a clear, direct relationship between the amount and the length of the prison sentence.
The penalty for gross corruption are ten years in prison. Three of Yara peaks are indicted for two conditions, which makes them theoretically risks a maximum of 20 years in prison. Gotschalk emphasizes that the longest sentence given for corruption in Norway is five and a half years. He says that people who bribe, generally judged also milder than those possible bribe.
– I can say at once that in this case is probably not someone sentenced to more than two years, he says.
Former CEO Thorleif Enger claims he did not know of the payments in Libya before he was notified of the proceedings and that he had delegated decision agreement in India to a lower level in the organization.
According to DN shall former executive director Tor Holba and former legal director Kendrick Wallace both during interrogation have alleged that the other had “knowledge of the matter.” Defender to Frenchman Daniel Clauw says he has not known, or been involved in irregular business practices in India or Libya.
Yara’s external investigation concluded with the discovery of over 100 million in “unacceptable payments” from the company subsidiary Balderton in Switzerland. Engers successor as CEO of Yara, recently retired Jørgen Ole Haslestad, has said that he had to make an ethical cleanup company when he took over. Although he notified However Økokrim until three years after he learned about the irregular payments, and not until after Dagens Næringsliv had begun to ask questions about the case.
This is the defendants:
Enger:
President of Yara 2004-2008.
Is accused of gross corruption both in Libya and India.
Economic Crime argues Enger approved the payout in India and endorsed both agreement negotiations. According to the indictment he signed also cooperation with NOC in Libya in 2008 with the knowledge that there was an agreement to pay bribes in which not all the installments were paid.
Enger has previously said in an interview with Aftenposten that he considers the agreement in India as an “ordinary consulting agreement.” Agreement in Libya, he claims that he first learned of in 2008, when he was notified of a pecuniary Libya Tor Holba.
Kendrick Wallace:
Former General Counsel of Yara.
Set in corporate management to Yara from 2004 to 2008.
According to Økokrim was Wallace who on behalf of Yara signed the disputed agreements both in Libya and in India.
Wallace is now retired and living in the United States.
His lawyer, Arild Dyngeland, told Aftenposten that he would not comment on the indictment before the case begins in court.
Daniel Clauw:
Set in corporate management in Yara from 2004 to 2006, as Chief Operating Officer and Deputy CEO. Then he was engaged as a consultant directly under beds with responsibility for Yara’s growth initiatives. This position he had until September 2007.
According to the indictment signed Clauw along with Kendrick Wallace agreement to pay money to Gurpreetesh Singh Maini in India. In Libya case, he contributed by suggesting that the payment should go through the business relationship Nitrochem and contact with the company to ensure that it happened. According to the indictment, he also gave its approval to that it should be agreed upon payment to Shukri Ghanem son.
Clauw not acknowledge guilt.
– My client has no knowledge of – and have either not been involved in – irregular or illegal business practices in India or Libya. Beyond this I ask for your understanding that he will defend himself in court, said his lawyer, Halvard Helle, DN.
Tor Holba:
Set in corporate management from 2004 to 2012, from 2006 as head of the upstream segment and the project owner for the negotiations in Libya.
The notice on the Libya agreement after Jørgen Ole Haslestad took over as CEO in 2008 and claims he was not aware of the agreement before the time.
Økokrim believes he endorsed it would be agreed to pay money to Shukri Ghanem son in 2007.
Holba worked still Yara when he was charged in the case, but was out of corporate management. He is laid off indefinitely.
Holba claims he is the whistleblower case, and that Økokrim builds case against him on allegations accomplices Kendrick Wallace has come with the questioning.
– Holba is evident that he is not guilty of the charges, and look forward to prove this in court, says his defender Nadia Christina Hall.
Published:
No comments:
Post a Comment