A BHP Billiton mining deal being investigated for alleged corruption was personally overseen by Cambodian strongman Hun Sen, diplomatic cables reveal.
Cambodia’s strongman, Prime Minister Hun Sen, personally oversaw the deal. Photo: Reuters
By Nick McKenzie and Richard Baker
The Australian Financial Review
The federal police made a “critical decision” not to investigate
criminal allegations that Australians working for BHP Billiton had bribed officials in Cambodia, China and Western Australia, and instead
handball the case to the corporate regulator, which also ran no probe.
Confidential documents reveal how the AFP and ASIC, with the
knowledge of federal government officials, mishandled one of the
nation’s highest-profile corporate graft cases after it was referred in
May 2010 by American officials to their Australian counterparts.
US anti-corruption investigators have been probing BHP Billiton since
2009, part of an ongoing inquiry that is likely to result in the
company receiving a massive fine, but had also told federal police that
the bribery allegations were “a matter for Australian authorities”.
A source close to the US investigation called the AFP’s initial
decision not to take up the inquiry “inexplicable” given the mining
giant is headquartered in Melbourne and the firm has allegedly broken
Australian criminal laws.
It was only recently that a self-initiated internal review led the
AFP to re-open the BHP Billiton bribery file and initiate a formal
investigation.
The AFP declined to state why it had closed its file on BHP in late
2011, 16 months after the case was referred to it by US officials,
without conducting its own investigation. But it said that it had
initially assessed the matter “with the knowledge that United States
authorities were investigating the matter”.
The AFP said that in February 2013, after further discussions with US
investigators, it began its own inquiry into “Australian nationals
identified during the US investigation”.
Evidence found by US investigators
Documents released to Fairfax Media under freedom-of-information laws
reveal that in May 2010, the Australian authorities were told that US
investigators had found evidence that BHP Billiton was allegedly “paying
bribes to foreign public officials”.
Such conduct would breach criminal laws passed in Australia in 1999.
It’s understood US officials also identified a public official in
Western Australia as having received potentially illegal inducements
from BHP Billiton, although this is redacted in the FOI documents, and
the AFP told Fairfax Media it could not comment on the local
allegations as they “form part of the ongoing investigation”.
The FOI files reveal that after the 2010 referral, the federal police
spent 12 months “evaluating” possible “bribery offences or corporations
law offences” without conducting any independent investigations,
despite having discussions with US authorities.
In May 2011, the AFP decided to handball the case to ASIC, a move
facilitated by an unnamed senior official from the financial crimes
division of the Attorney-General’s Department .
“It was recommended by [the AFP] . . . that [ASIC] take the lead role
in Australian inquiries in the matter,” an AFP executive briefing note
from 2011 states.
“Should any criminal offences be identified by [ASIC] during their inquiries the matter shall be referred [back] to the AFP.”
ASIC has no jurisdiction to probe bribery but can probe related corporate offences. It also conducted no in-depth investigations. According to the FOI files, “on 23 September 2011, the matter was formally rejected [for investigation] by the AFP”.
Matter includes ‘senior government representation’
BHP’s aborted attempt to establish a bauxite mine in Cambodia and its
hospitality program for Chinese officials at the 2008 Beijing Olympics
is among the conduct being examined by the federal police. According to
diplomatic cables previously published by Fairfax Media, the Cambodian
deal was personally overseen by Prime Minister and strongman Hun Sen.
The handwritten notes of a senior AFP investigator, released in the
FOI files, reveal the AFP had identified the role of Australian
officials in the deal. “It should be noted that this matter does include
senior Australian government representation as a result of BHP Billiton
negotiations,” the file note states.
The allegations involving a Western Australian public official are
likely to be probed by WA authorities because they involve state
offences.
The documents reveal that instead of conducting its own
investigations in 2010 and 2011, the AFP relied on teleconference
briefings from the US Securities and Exchange Commission and Justice
Department. “It was anticipated that this [teleconference briefings]
would enable the AFP to obtain sufficient information on which to
conduct an evaluation and determine if the matter was in the
jurisdiction of the AFP,” an executive brief dated March 2011 states.
An executive brief dated June 2011 reveals that the federal police
“received a quantity of documents from BHP and the Attorney-General’s
Department in relation to the matter” and which were marked by BHP
Billiton as commercially sensitive. This appears to have further stalled
the handling of the case by Australian authorities.
“Documents provided directly to the AFP contained a caveat from BHP
requesting confidentiality due to commercial sensitivity,” the June 2011
executive brief states.
“AFP Legal were not able to provide definitive advice in relation to
disclosure. After several failed attempts to obtain appropriate advice
in a timely manner, a decision was made to return the documents to the
AGD [Attorney-General’s Department] and request disclosure by them
directly” to ASIC.
Improved interaction
In a statement, the AFP said it continued to improve the way it
interacted with other agencies, including ASIC. The corporate regulator
has been criticised for failing to investigate serious corporate
offences referred to it by AFP investigators who charged two Reserve
Bank firms, Note Printing Australia and Securency, with foreign bribery
in 2011.
The move by the AFP to allow the matter to be referred to ASIC for
investigation in May 2011 is described in a February 2013 federal police
document as a “critical decision” but one “deemed to be consistent”
with the investigative approach taken in the US, where the corporate
regulator leads the inquiry into BHP Billiton. ASIC refused to answer
questions about why it failed to investigate BHP Billiton.
The February 2013 AFP briefing that reveals an investigation had been
finally launched states: “It is anticipated this investigation will
require two to three members for three to six months to fully evaluate
the matter and then, depending on the proposed course of action, require
two to six members for a further three to six months.”
Lawyer and foreign bribery expert Mini vandePol said the case showed
Australia needed a dedicated bribery and corruption regulator.
“This example still shows the US leading the way in this area.”
No comments:
Post a Comment