Joshua Ray

Joshua Ray

Partner at Rahman Ravelli - UNITED KINGDOM

Josh is an English solicitor and US-qualified lawyer who defends companies and individuals in complex investigations, prosecutions and regulatory actions. His work focuses on multi-jurisdictional matters involving fraud, bribery, money laundering and market manipulation, and he leads Rahman Ravelli’s US-facing business crime practice group. He is the co-author of a forthcoming book, White Collar Criminal Prosecutions in the US and UK: A Comparative Guide for Practitioners, scheduled to be published by the Judicial Division of the American Bar Association in 2021.

All Sessions by Joshua Ray

Day 3 - Stream 1 April 14, 2021
5:30 am - 6:00 am

LEGAL ISSUES: Handling corruption issues (Why Corruption Risk is Not Just About the FCPA)


A decision last summer of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan dramatically expanded the ability of US prosecutors to target corruption in jurisdictions around the world. This case has significant implications for businesses both within and outside of the U.S., especially those engaged in development projects sponsored by multilateral development banks (MDBs) or the International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), whose financing comes in large part from the US government. The decision in United States v. Napout confirmed that foreign bribery can be prosecuted in the United States as wire fraud, even when it does not involve a US-based company or a US citizen. In other words, conduct that does not fall within the jurisdiction of the FCPA can still be liable to prosecution in the U.S.—per this decision, all that prosecutors need to show is that a communications was made from or to the U.S. as part of an “essential” element of a bribe scheme. This could be hugely significant for MDB and DFC financed projects, since they will almost always involve a US communication. As such, it is possible for the US to prosecute individuals and companies who operate entirely from abroad, and even in situations where the conduct at issue is legal under local law. The significance of this decision is important to how companies craft and implement their anti-bribery compliance practices.