Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Strategies for Advising Foreign Clients As DOJ Pursues Extraterritorial Criminal Cases
Recent developments suggest that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) will continue to pursue extraterritorial criminal cases in connection with the government's broader programmatic goals. For example, as the private sector works to implement sanctions recently imposed in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, prosecutors will likely seek to investigate violations of those measures and efforts to evade them by foreign actors, including in the cybersecurity and cryptocurrency spaces. Foreign targets are also likely part of the "robust pipeline" of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) cases referenced by senior DOJ official Nicholas McQuaid in January 2022. As DOJ looks abroad to support the Biden Administration's national security and criminal justice objectives, the defense bar will continue to be called upon to advise foreign clients, with assistance from local counsel, on risks related to arrest and extradition (as well as the substance of the investigations). This article addresses some issues to consider, including foreign arrest procedures, contesting extradition, and engaging with prosecutors before a defendant arrives in the United States.
Foreign Arrest Procedures
DOJ initiates many foreign arrests by seeking provisional arrest warrants through INTERPOL or diplomatic channels, and then pursuing extraditions pursuant to existing treaties after the defendant is in foreign custody. Nevertheless, lawyers evaluating the possibility of foreign arrest in connection with a U.S. prosecution should be sensitive to the fact that DOJ can coordinate arrests in countries where there is no bilateral treaty. In June 2020, DOJ secured the arrest of Venezuelan national Alex Saab in Cabo Verde despite the absence of such an agreement. The United States relied principally on the U.N. Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime. After extensive litigation, Cabo Verde transferred Saab to the United States to face international money laundering charges.
The possibility of arrest while transiting an airport in another country, including pursuant to a DOJ-initiated lure operation, also merits consideration. DOJ's Justice Manual describes lures as "using a subterfuge to entice a criminal defendant" to travel to a country that is more favorable to the United States. A lure operation can result in extradition from the lured-to country, and these government actions are difficult to challenge after a defendant arrives in America. In 2018, the United States appears to have lured Chinese national Yanjun Xu to Belgium from China, which has no extradition treaty with the United States. Belgian authorities extradited Xu, and he was convicted in the United States of espionage and trade secrets offenses in 2021.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?