FRANCE Law and Practice Contributed by: Christophe Ingrain, Tristan Gautier and Benoît Martinez, Darrois Villey Maillot & Brochier
documents (contracts, financial statements) or false accounting (Articles L. 241-3 and L. 242-6, C.Com.), and bankruptcy-related offences (Articles L. 654-1 et seq., C.Com.). 3.2 Bribery, Influence Peddling and Related Offences Bribery French law distinguishes between two types of brib - ery: • Passive Bribery (Articles 432-11, 445-1 and 445-2, CP): This is the act of soliciting or accepting offers, promises, gifts or benefits of any kind on one’s own behalf or that of a third party (bribery can be direct or indirect through a third-party accomplice). • Active Bribery (Articles 433-1 and 445-1, CP): This is the act of giving or proposing offers, promises, gifts or benefits of any kind on one’s own behalf or that of a third party. Bribery in the public sector is punishable by ten years’ imprisonment and a fine of EUR1 million, or even EUR2 million if the offence is committed by an organ - ised group (Articles 432-11 and 433-1, CP). If the per - petrators of corruption are elected officials, civil serv - ants, holders of public authority in a foreign state or employees of a public international organisation, the same penalties apply (Articles 435-1 and 435-2, CP). Corruption between persons in the private sector is punishable by five years’ imprisonment and a fine of EUR500,000 (Articles 445-1 et seq., CP). In all cases, additional penalties may apply. Influence Peddling As with bribery, there are two offences, which are independent of each other: passive influence peddling (Articles 432-11 and 433-2, CP) and active influence peddling (Articles 433-1 and 433-2, CP). The means of the action are the same as for bribery: offers, promis - es, gifts, presents or advantages of any kind. Influence peddling can also be direct or indirect, and occur at any time. To be recognised by law, it must necessarily be an intentional offence. The perpetrator of the offence pays a person who, unlike in the case of bribery, has no direct power but who has a “network”: they are paid to exert influence
on a third party – ie, to act as a kind of intermediary, thanks to the influence they have because of their social position. The proposal or solicitation is made with a view to obtaining awards, jobs, contracts, ten - ders or any favourable decision – this last purpose being so broad that it covers virtually all situations. The sanctions imposed for influence peddling are comparable to those applicable to corruption offenc - es. 3.3 Anti-Bribery Regulation The framework for anti-bribery regulation primarily stems from the Sapin II Law and related provisions in the Criminal Code. Compliance obligations are mandatory for private entities or public industrial or commercial undertak - ings that meet the two following cumulative criteria (Article 17-I of the Sapin II Law): • employing at least 500 employees, or belonging to a group whose parent company meets that thresh - old; and • having a turnover, or consolidated turnover, exceeding EUR100 million. For these companies, the law prescribes that a com - pliance programme includes (but is not limited to) the following measures (Article 131-39-2, CP): • a code of conduct defining prohibited behaviours that could constitute offences of bribery or influ - ence peddling; • an internal whistle-blowing system to collecting reports; • a regularly updated risk map of exposure to bribery risks; • procedures for evaluating clients, major suppliers and intermediaries according to the risk map; • internal or external accounting controls; • training for staff and managers that are the most exposed to risks of bribery and influence peddling; • a disciplinary sanction regime for violations; and • a system of internal monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of the measures adopted (Article 17-II, Sapin II Law).
59 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook