What is the responsibility of a company to assure itself that monies it pays out do not go to fund international terrorism? After all, one of the direct reasons for the dramatic growth of FCPA enforcement from 2004 to 2014 was the events leading up to 9/11. The FCPA was viewed as a tool in the fight against terrorism, as corruption has a linear relationship to terrorism. This question, however, has taken on a different and perhaps greater urgency after the revelations of continuing operations of a cement facility in Syria by the chemical giant LafargeHolcim until September 2014.
LafargeHolcim has admitted it took “unacceptable” measures to keep the facility safe and operating as the Syrian civil war convulsed. The company has obliquely said that executives running the facility “made significant errors in judgment” which included payments to “armed groups, including sanctioned parties” to keep the plant safe, up, and running. These actions violated the company’s Code of Conduct and unidentified internal controls.
