The Avanti Law Group
1 view | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Margaret Parsons!

The Avanti Group Reviews Tokyo Laws: Bekæmpelse af sørøveri og røveri i Sydøstasien

The Avanti Group Reviews Tokyo Laws: Bekæmpelse af sørøveri og røveri i Sydøstasien | The Avanti Law Group |
Hvad forklarer den ti år lange nedgang i sørøveri og røveri i Sydøst Asien? Miha Hribernik hævder, at regionalt samarbejde – primært gennem ReCAAP mekanismen – har været en vigtig faktor, som vil...
Margaret Parsons's insight:

Hvad forklarer den ti år lange nedgang i sørøveri og røveri i Sydøst Asien? Miha Hribernik hævder, at regionalt samarbejde – primært gennem ReCAAP mekanismen – har været en vigtig faktor, som vil blive endnu vigtigere med tilføjet deltagelse i Malaysia og Indonesien.


Sidste år har vi oplevet et fald i rapporteret [2] angreb mod skibe i nogle af verdens mest piratkopiering udsatte områder, såsom Adenbugten og – for første gang siden 2009-i Sydøstasien.[3] i den samme periode, men steget hyppigheden af angreb i nogle dele af sidstnævnte betydeligt, især i de farvande og havne i Indonesien. Dette papir anfører følgende: først, at den forbedring af situationen i Sydøstasien som helhed, i vid udstrækning kan tilskrives succes af multilaterale counter - pirateri initiativer, hovedsagelig den regionale samarbejdsaftale om bekæmpelse af sørøveri og væbnet røveri mod skibe i Asien (ReCAAP). Andet, Malaysia og Indonesien – kun to Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) medlemsstaterne, ikke der ReCAAP kontraherende parter – tiltrædelse kunne bidrage til den mekanisme større effektivitet i Sydøstasien. Deltagelse af Indonesien kunne navnlig hjælpe håndtere det hurtigt stigende antal piratvirksomhed og røverier hændelser til søs inden for dens jurisdiktion. Tredje, multilaterale initiativer som ReCAAP repræsenterer en ideel mulighed for den Europæiske Union (EU) og enkelte europæiske stater til at øge deres indflydelse i Sydøstasien og vinde fodfæste som sikkerhedsaktører i regionen.

No comment yet.
Scooped by Margaret Parsons!

The Avanti Law Group: Under False Claims Act

Under False Claims Act, whistleblowers get their share of billions


Constance Lyttle's job at AT&T slowly shifted from helping deaf people make phone calls, to assisting the efforts of foreign scam artists intent on ripping off Americans.


She refused to play along, and was eventually fired by AT&T, which was getting millions of dollars in government funds to run a scam-plagued system for relaying the calls of deaf people.


"I didn't have a college degree. There's not a lot of good jobs here" in the Mercer area, Ms. Lyttle, 56, said this month. "I had bills to pay, just like everybody else in America."


Her answer, ultimately, was to sue AT&T under the federal False Claims Act. That act allows an individual to sue on behalf of the government when he or she sees federal funds spent fraudulently.


Nationally, the act last year generated nearly $3 billion in settlements and judgments against those accused of fraud, most of which went back to the government, with the whistleblowers getting a share. Most of the big settlements came when federal attorneys opted to join the side of the whistleblower.


But until 2010, U.S. attorneys operating out of Pittsburgh stayed on the sidelines, never intervening for whistleblowers.


Then U.S. Attorney David Hickton decided to use federal investigators and attorneys to help some whistleblowers, including Ms. Lyttle. Mr. Hickton's attorneys have put federal muscle behind whistleblowers in five cases, whereas his predecessors in that office had never taken that step.


Now Pittsburgh is starting to become a bigger player in the multibillion-dollar False Claims Act arena, reeling in $9.95 million in recoveries for the government since 2010. With the settlement in November of Ms. Lyttle's claim, and a potential 2015 trial in a federal lawsuit against Downtown-based Education Management Corp., Pittsburgh is now considered friendly territory for whistleblower-filed cases.


"It's extremely unusual for a district of medium size, like the Western District of Pennsylvania, to become a national player in handling cases of this scope," said attorney Harry Litman, who was Pittsburgh's top federal prosecutor from 1998 to 2001, and now works as a private lawyer on False Claims Act cases, including one against EDMC. He said that Mr. Hickton's "office has become a national leader in the practice."


That's encouraging to attorneys who specialize in pursuing those who rip off Uncle Sam.


There are "large sums of money that the taxpayers are providing to the government to provide services," said Downtown attorney Andrew Stone. "We know there's no shortage of fraud."

No comment yet.
Scooped by Margaret Parsons!

Supreme Court extends whistle-blower protections under anti-fraud law

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court on Tuesday expanded protections for whistle blowers covered by an anti-fraud law passed following the collapse of energy giant Enron, ruling outside accountants, auditors and lawyers cannot be fired or punished for exposing fraud.


The 6-3 decision will have an effect in the mutual fund and financial services industries, the court said, because they rely heavily on outside contractors and advisers.


The case before the court arose when two employees of a firm that did research for the Fidelity family of mutual funds revealed the funds were overstating expenses. They alleged that in some instances, Fidelity was operating “veiled index funds” while collecting a fee as though they were actively managed.


The two employees say they were reprimanded and ultimately dismissed for having exposed this fraud. When they sued their employer under the Sarbannes-Oxley Act, they lost when an appeals court ruled the law’s protection for whistle blowers covered only employees of public firms, not outside advisers and accountants.


In their appeal to the high court, they said this would reimpose “the very code of silence” that allowed massive frauds such as Enron to occur.


Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, speaking for the court, said Congress meant to broadly protect whistle blowers who could expose wrongdoing. It made no sense, she said, to think “a Congress, prompted by the Enron debacle, would exclude from whistle-blower protection countless professionals equipped to bring fraud on investors to a halt.”


Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Stephen G. Breyer and Elena Kagan agreed.


A dissent was filed by Justice Sonia Sotomayor who said the law covered only “employees” of public companies, not outside advisers. Justices Anthony Kennedy and Samuel Alito agreed with her.


The whistle-blower provisions in the law protect those who reveal frauds from retaliation, and they also allow them to receive a share of money that is recovered if a fraud is exposed.



No comment yet.