DOJ Promises NPAs to Certain Individuals Through New Voluntary Self-Disclosure Pilot Program
Client Alert | 3 min read | 04.23.24
On April 15, 2024, the Acting Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) Nicole Argentieri announced a new Pilot Program on Voluntary Self-Disclosure for Individuals (“Pilot Program” or “Program”). The Pilot Program offers a clear path for voluntary self-disclosure by certain corporate executives and other individuals who are themselves involved in misconduct by corporations, in exchange for a Non-Prosecution Agreement (“NPA”). The Pilot Program specifically targets individuals who disclose to the Criminal Division at DOJ in Washington, D.C. information about certain corporate criminal conduct. By carving out a clear path to non-prosecution for those who qualify, DOJ has created another tool to uncover complex crimes that might not otherwise be reported to the Department.
The Pilot Program was announced at NYU School of Law’s Program on Corporate Compliance and Enforcement. It follows Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco’s March 7 announcement that DOJ plans to implement a new whistleblower program that provides financial rewards to individuals who provide information leading to civil or criminal forfeitures. It also follows a Southern District of New York-specific whistleblower program announced in January that offers NPAs to individuals meeting certain conditions who voluntarily disclose criminal conduct, as well as a similar program in the Northern District of California that was subsequently announced in March.
Program Highlights and Criteria
The Pilot Program has the potential to significantly expand the scope of whistleblower protection and incentives offered by DOJ in criminal cases. Although the prospect of NPAs has long been an important tool in DOJ’s corporate criminal enforcement arsenal, the Pilot Program sets forth clear guidelines—offering certainty to individuals that they will not be prosecuted by DOJ if they satisfy the Program’s enumerated criteria.
The Pilot Program guarantees an NPA to individuals who disclose misconduct that is not public or previously known to DOJ, relating to at least one of the following:
- Violations by financial institutions, their insiders, or agents;
- Violations related to the integrity of financial markets undertaken (1) by financial institutions, investment advisors, or investment funds, (2) by or through public companies or private companies with 50 or more employees, or (3) by any insiders or agents of any such entities;
- Violations related to foreign corrupt bribery;
- Violations by companies with 50 or more employees relating to fraud or deception of the U.S. in relation to federally funded contracting (not including health care fraud); and/or
- Violations related to bribes or kickbacks involving domestic public officials.
Additionally, the disclosure must be voluntary, truthful, and complete. The individual must also agree to fully cooperate with DOJ, forfeit or disgorge any profit from the offense and pay any applicable restitution. Finally, certain categories of individuals are disqualified from taking advantage of this Program. That includes individuals who: have previously engaged in certain types of criminal conduct (including violent offenses); are the CEO, CFO, or the organizer of the scheme; are an elected or appointed government official, either foreign or domestic; or have a previous felony conviction for a crime involving fraud or dishonesty.
What This Means for Companies
As DOJ continues to empower whistleblowers, the message is clear: companies must continue to invest in compliance programs that help prevent, detect, and remediate misconduct. That investment includes ensuring compliance programs are tailored to the company’s unique risk profile and regulatory environment; employees understand the contours of the company’s policies; employees are aware of reporting mechanisms available to them; and, employees are empowered to report their concerns and misconduct. Crowell attorneys are experienced in assessing the strength of corporate compliance and whistleblower programs, evaluating complaint channels and other areas where stakeholders make their concerns known, and, where necessary, investigating whistleblower complaints.
Insights
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.16.24
Over the past several years, federal courts have increasingly questioned the authority of administrative law judges (ALJs) to adjudicate alleged violations of certain labor and employment statutes. In the last several weeks, two U.S. district courts in Texas issued decisions halting unfair labor practice proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on the grounds that NLRB ALJs lack the constitutional authority to preside over such actions due to unconstitutional protections against their removal.[1] Similarly, the last year has seen several decisions by courts in the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits finding that ALJs, whose decisions are not reviewable by a Presidential appointee, lack constitutional authority under the Appointments Clause to adjudicate claims.[2] The trend illustrated by these decisions, combined with the Supreme Court’s decision in June to abandon the Chevron doctrine of extending deference to federal agency rule-making proceedings, portend significant changes in the way employers interact with federal agencies that enforce labor and employment law.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.15.24
Department of Defense Plans Increased Investment in Clean Energy
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.15.24