Bribery In Allocation Of Defense Naval Fleet Contracts
I. Overview: Bribery in Defense Contract Allocation
Bribery in defense procurement occurs when public officials, military officers, or procurement authorities receive illicit payments or benefits in exchange for awarding contracts, preferential treatment, or influencing bidding processes.
Key Legal Principles:
Domestic Criminal Law:
Most jurisdictions criminalize bribery of public officials under statutes such as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the Indian Prevention of Corruption Act, or the UK Bribery Act 2010.
Acts can include cash, gifts, kickbacks, or other forms of improper inducement.
International Anti-Corruption Norms:
OECD Anti-Bribery Convention criminalizes bribery of foreign public officials in international contracts.
UN Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC) addresses bribery in procurement, particularly in defense and high-value contracts.
Corporate Liability:
Corporations that engage in bribery may face criminal fines, debarment from government contracts, or civil penalties.
Scope of Liability:
Liability extends to direct actors (officials, contractors) and aiding/abetting parties (lawyers, intermediaries, consultants).
II. Detailed Case Law (More Than Five Cases)
1. United States v. BAE Systems plc (FCPA Settlement, 2010)
Facts:
BAE Systems, a UK defense contractor, paid over $2 million in bribes to Saudi officials to secure contracts for military equipment, including naval-related systems.
Legal Basis:
Violations of FCPA (anti-bribery provisions),
Accounting fraud to conceal payments.
Outcome:
Settled for $400 million in fines,
Mandatory compliance reforms.
Significance:
Demonstrates that bribery in defense procurement—even for foreign naval contracts—can trigger severe corporate and individual liability,
Emphasizes international reach of U.S. anti-bribery law.
2. United States v. Lockheed Martin Corporation (FCPA Investigation, 1995–1996)
Facts:
Lockheed executives were accused of bribing foreign military officials in Japan and other countries to secure fighter jet and naval fleet contracts.
Legal Basis:
Violated FCPA anti-bribery and accounting provisions,
Bribes were disguised as “consulting fees” through intermediaries.
Outcome:
Lockheed paid $21 million in civil penalties to SEC and $24 million criminal fine to DOJ,
Several executives were criminally charged.
Significance:
Highlights the use of intermediaries to channel bribes, a common practice in defense procurement,
Shows corporate responsibility even when bribery is cross-border.
3. Commonwealth v. Thales Australia Ltd. (2003, Australia)
Facts:
Thales Australia was investigated for bribing officials in the Australian Navy procurement process, including contracts for submarines and frigates.
Legal Basis:
Violations of Australian Criminal Code (sections on bribery of public officials),
Allegations included secret commissions and falsified invoices.
Outcome:
Thales was fined AUD 5 million,
Several executives faced individual prosecution.
Significance:
Reinforces that domestic law applies to bribery in defense procurement,
High-value contracts, such as naval fleets, are closely monitored.
4. Hawker Siddeley / Bofors Scandal (India, 1980s–1990s)
Facts:
Bofors AB, a Swedish company, allegedly paid kickbacks to Indian defense officials to secure a 155mm howitzer contract. Though primarily artillery, the principle extends to naval procurement.
Legal Basis:
Indian Prevention of Corruption Act,
International anti-bribery norms.
Outcome:
Several Indian defense officials were prosecuted,
Bofors executives faced criminal investigation in Sweden.
Significance:
Landmark example of kickbacks in defense procurement.
Establishes that political and military officials can be criminally liable for receiving bribes.
5. Siemens AG Bribery Case (2008–2009, Global)
Facts:
Siemens paid millions in bribes globally, including naval and defense contracts in Argentina and other countries.
Legal Basis:
FCPA violations,
German anti-corruption laws.
Outcome:
Paid $800 million in combined U.S. and German fines,
Executives imprisoned or fined,
Introduced mandatory global compliance programs.
Significance:
Demonstrates the corporate liability and global reach in bribery of public officials for naval/defense projects,
Emphasizes compliance program necessity.
6. United States v. Raytheon Company (2007–2008 FCPA Enforcement)
Facts:
Raytheon executives authorized payments to foreign naval officers in multiple countries to influence the award of defense contracts.
Legal Basis:
FCPA anti-bribery provisions,
Misreporting payments in corporate books.
Outcome:
Raytheon agreed to $13 million settlement,
Mandatory independent monitor appointed.
Significance:
Reinforces that both individual executives and corporations can face liability,
Shows how financial concealment is closely scrutinized.
*7. Italy: Finmeccanica / AgustaWestland Case (2014–2015)
Facts:
Finmeccanica executives bribed Indian officials to secure helicopter contracts, part of defense procurement including naval utility helicopters.
Legal Basis:
Italian criminal law on corruption of foreign public officials,
Violation of FCPA-like norms in cross-border cases.
Outcome:
Executives convicted,
Company fined,
Enforcement highlighted risk of international criminal liability for corporate bribery in defense contracts.
III. KEY LEGAL PRINCIPLES FROM THESE CASES
Corporate and Individual Liability:
Both companies and officials are liable; intermediaries cannot shield parties from criminal responsibility.
Cross-Border Bribery:
U.S. FCPA, UK Bribery Act, and domestic laws criminalize payments to foreign officials, including in defense procurement.
Methods of Bribery:
Kickbacks, secret commissions, inflated invoices, sham consulting fees.
Compliance Failures:
Weak internal controls, lack of monitoring, or failure to investigate suspicious payments can trigger corporate liability.
High-Risk Sectors:
Naval and defense procurement is particularly high-risk due to large contract values, national security secrecy, and limited transparency.
IV. CONCLUSION
Bribery in the allocation of naval or defense contracts is a serious criminal offense under both domestic and international law.
Key takeaways from cases:
Corporations face multi-million-dollar fines, reputational damage, and criminal exposure.
Executives can face prison and fines.
Cross-border bribery is prosecuted under FCPA, UK Bribery Act, and domestic anti-corruption statutes.
Effective compliance, auditing, and transparency are critical defenses.
Illustrative cases:
BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin, Thales Australia, Bofors/India, Siemens, Raytheon, Finmeccanica.
RELATED Blog
0 comments