A Paris criminal court’s conviction of Lafarge and eight former executives sharpens a compliance lesson already underscored by the company’s 2022 U.S. guilty plea: payments framed as security, transit, or operating costs in a war zone can be recast by prosecutors and judges as terrorism financing, sanctions evasion, and senior-management misconduct when a company chooses to keep business running under armed-group control.
This item is available in full to subscribers.
To continue reading, you will need to either log in to your subscriber account, below, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current subscriber, and had an account on our previous site, you already have an account. If you have not yet logged into our new site, click here to reset your password.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
