Duterte’s ‘soft heart’ could save ABS-CBN, says election lawyer View comments LIVE: Sinulog 2020 Grand Parade End of his agony? SC rules in favor of Espinosa, orders promoter heirs to pay boxing legend Sports Related Videospowered by AdSparcRead Next 787 earthquakes recorded in 24 hours due to restive Taal Volcano Missile-capable frigate BRP Jose Rizal inches closer to entering PH Navy’s fleet Mark Isip. PBA IMAGESMark Isip ignited Marinerong Pilipino’s 119-74 blowout win over Zark’s Burgers to stay in the running in the 2017 PBA D-League Foundation Cup Tuesday at Ynares Sports Arena in Pasig.The 36-year-old forward unleashed nine of his 12 points in the first quarter and got six rebounds to help the Skippers string their first back-to-back wins.ADVERTISEMENT Robby Celiz paced cellar-dweller Zark’s Burgers (1-8) with 16 points, five rebounds, and four assists, while James Mangahas got 12 markers and five boards in the defeat.Mac Cardona fired 11 points, three rebounds, and two assists in 23 minutes of play for the Jawbreakers in the first game of his comeback tour to revive his professional career.The Scores:MARINERONG PILIPINO 119 – Javelona 17, Lopez 15, Isip 12, Moralde 12, Salcedo 12, Gumaru 11, Publico 11, Alabanza 7, Subido 7, Iñigo 5, Sargent 4, Gavieres 4, Javillonar 2, Marata 0.ZARK’S BURGERS 74 – Celiz 16, Mangahas 12, De Leon 11, Cardona 11, Argamino 9, Nalos 6, Bautista 5, Cudal 4, Ferrer 0.ADVERTISEMENT LATEST STORIES IT happens: Facebook sorry for Xi Jinping’s name mistranslation Quarters: 27-15, 55-38, 87-57, 119-74. Teng shows he can do more than just score Don’t miss out on the latest news and information. Isip triggered Marinerong Pilipino’s early 11-0 run to pullaway, 17-7, before extending the lead to its biggest at 45 late in the game.“We just want to break their spirit early on, pound them, and attack them. The players responded even if we found out that Mac (Cardona) was playing today,” said coach Koy Banal.FEATURED STORIESSPORTSEnd of his agony? SC rules in favor of Espinosa, orders promoter heirs to pay boxing legendSPORTSRedemption is sweet for Ginebra, Scottie ThompsonSPORTSMayweather beats Pacquiao, Canelo for ‘Fighter of the Decade’Pao Javelona was all over the court as he led the Skippers with 17 markers, seven assists, four boards, and three steals, while John Lopez just missed out on a double-double with his 15 points and nine rebounds.The victory kept Marinerong Pilipino in the race to the top six with its 3-4 record, identical with Racal Motors, as it sits a game behind sixth placer Batangas (4-3) in the standings. MOST READ Malacañang open to creating Taal Commission Marcosian mode: Duterte threatens to arrest water execs ‘one night’ IT happens: Facebook sorry for Xi Jinping’s name mistranslation Filipinos turn Taal Volcano ash, plastic trash into bricks PLAY LIST 01:40Filipinos turn Taal Volcano ash, plastic trash into bricks01:32Taal Volcano watch: Island fissures steaming, lake water receding02:14Carpio hits red carpet treatment for China Coast Guard02:56NCRPO pledges to donate P3.5 million to victims of Taal eruption00:56Heavy rain brings some relief in Australia02:37Calm moments allow Taal folks some respite
It’s not exactly how the Cardinals drew it up, but it’s the reality they are dealing with. And that’s fine.“Everybody has all the confidence in the world in Drew, and Logan’s getting better,” Cardinals coach Bruce Arians said. Derrick Hall satisfied with D-backs’ buying and selling Top Stories TEMPE, Ariz. — The Arizona Cardinals are viewing Carson Palmer’s nerve injury as a week-to-week issue, with the belief that it could “wake up” at any given time and allow the quarterback to resume his role as the team’s starter.Until then, however, the job will continue to belong to Drew Stanton. And behind Stanton, rookie Logan Thomas waits. In a perfect world, neither would have taken a snap in 2014. But that’s not how things work, and until Palmer is ready to go, the team will continue to rely on a quarterback who before this season had not thrown a regular season pass since 2010. And, should something happen to him, they will turn to a quarterback was as raw a prospect as you could find in last May’s draft. The 5: Takeaways from the Coyotes’ introduction of Alex Meruelo Grace expects Greinke trade to have emotional impact Comments Share Former Cardinals kicker Phil Dawson retires
Legal scrutiny – whether in the FCPA context or otherwise – is a cloud hanging over a business organization. When that legal scrutiny can result in potential criminal liability, the cloud is black or at the very least gray.For many companies, the gray cloud of FCPA scrutiny simply lasts too long.If you dig into the details of most corporate FCPA enforcement actions you quickly discover that the alleged conduct at issue occurred 5-7 years, 7-10 years, and in some instances, 10-15 years prior to the enforcement action.For instance, in a 2012 enforcement action against pharmaceutical company Biomet the conduct at issue went back to 2000; in a 2012 enforcement action against pharmaceutical company Pfizer the conduct at issue went back to 1997; and in a 2012 enforcement action against trading and investment firm Marubeni the conduct at issue went back to 1995. Likewise, in a 2013 enforcement action against oil and gas company Total, the conduct at issue went back to 1995. So old was the conduct giving rise to the Total enforcement action that the DOJ made the unusual statement in the DPA that “evidentiary challenges” were present for both parties given that “most of the underlying conduct occurred in the 1990s and early 2000s.”Statute of limitations are ordinarily the remedy the law provides for legal gray clouds.In 2013, in Gabelli v. SEC (an SEC enforcement action outside the FCPA context) the Supreme Court stated:“Statute of limitations are intended to ‘promote justice by preventing surprises through the revival of claims that have been allowed to slumber until evidence has been lost, memories have faded, and witnesses have disappeared. They provide ‘security and stability to human affairs. [They] are ‘vital to the welfare of society [and] ‘even wrongdoers are entitled to assume that their sins may be forgotten.’ […] It ‘would be utterly repugnant to the genius of our laws if actions for penalties could ‘be brought at any distance of time.’”The Supreme Court further stated that statute of limitations are even more important in a government enforcement action compared to a case brought by a private plaintiff.“There are good reasons why the fraud discovery rule has not been extended to Government enforcement actions for civil penalties. […] The SEC, for example, is not like an individual victim who relies on apparent injury to learn of a wrong. Rather, a central ‘mission’ of the Commission is to ‘investigate potential violations of the federal securities laws.’ Unlike the private party who has no reason to suspect fraud, the SEC’s very purpose is to root it out, and it has many legal tools at hand to aid in that pursuit. […] Charged with this mission and armed with these weapons, the SEC as enforcer is a far cry from the defrauded victim the discovery rule evolved to protect. In a civil penalty action, the Government is not only a different kind of plaintiff, it seeks a different kind of relief. The discovery rule helps to ensure that the injured receive recompense. But this case involves penalties, which go beyond compensation, and are intended to punish, and label defendants wrongdoers.”Why, despite the importance of statute of limitations to our legal system and Supreme Court recognition that it “would be utterly repugnant to the genius of our laws if actions for penalties could be brought at any distance of time,” do most corporate FCPA enforcement actions concern conduct well beyond the statute of limitations?Simply put, because in corporate FCPA enforcement actions the fundamental black-letter legal principle of statute of limitations seems not to matter. Granted counsel for a company under FCPA scrutiny based on conduct beyond the limitations period can argue about statute of limitation defenses around conference room tables behind closed doors in Washington, D.C. However, like with other FCPA issues, to truly challenge the enforcement agencies first requires that the company be criminally or civilly charged, something few corporate leaders are willing to let happen.In short, cooperation is the name of the game in corporate FCPA inquiries and to raise bona fide legal arguments such as statute of limitations is not cooperating in an investigation. Given the “carrots” and “sticks” relevant to resolving corporate FCPA enforcement actions, one of the first steps a company the subject of FCPA scrutiny often does to demonstrate its cooperation is agree to toll the statute of limitations or waive any statute of limitations defenses.A former DOJ enforcement attorney noted:“As a practical matter, companies, especially publicly held companies […], typically make a strategic decision to fully cooperate with a DOJ investigation. Despite the potential success of a statute of limitations defense, a company will often make the judgment that the negative press of a protracted investigation and the uncertainty of the outcome at trial make cooperation the more prudent business judgment. The company’s hope is that it will be given credit for the cooperation and it will achieve a better outcome than if it went to trial (i.e., avoid charges, a DPA, or a reduced fine).”Given this dynamic, the enforcement agencies face little or no time pressure in bringing corporate FCPA enforcement actions. The end result is that the gray cloud of FCPA scrutiny often hangs over a company far too long. For instance, Pfizer’s FCPA scrutiny began in 2004 but was not resolved until a 2012 enforcement action. Likewise, Total’s FCPA scrutiny began in 2003 but was not resolved until a 2013 enforcement action.Regarding the typical long periods of corporate FCPA scrutiny, an FCPA commentator stated:“[Companies under FCPA scrutiny are] routinely asked to waive the statute of limitations. They could refuse but none do; refusal might trigger an instant enforcement action against the company or its people. So the waiver gives the feds limitless time to investigate, deliberate, or procrastinate. And no one can force the DOJ or SEC to move on, either with an enforcement action or a declination. The result? Companies [under FCPA scrutiny] get stuck in FCPA limbo. […] But the DOJ and SEC should always keep one eye on the calendar. The threat of FCPA enforcement […] casts a long shadow. It darkens the future for management, shareholders, lenders, customers, and suppliers. Exactly the problem the statute of limitations was supposed to fix.”Another FCPA commentator stated:“The Justice Department and the SEC attorneys have a duty to manage caseloads and move cases responsibly. I called it “cut and run.” Either the government has the evidence or it does not – and they now fairly early on what direction a case is heading.”All of the above comments are of course spot-on.Yet when black letter legal principles matter little, the end result is that the gray cloud of FCPA scrutiny simply lasts too long and the DOJ and SEC are part of the problem.