How Monitorships Are Evolving in Brazil and the United States: What Defines Success in the Eyes of the Authorities, the Company, and the Monitor

May 22, 2019 12:00pm

Carla Verissimo

Carla Veríssimo
Procuradora Regional da República
Ministério Público Federal (MPF)

Everson Zaczuk Bassinello

Everson Zaczuk Bassinello
Chief Audit, Risk & Compliance Officer

Otavio Yazbek

Otávio Yazbek
Partner (Compliance Monitor for Odebrecht)
Yazbek Advogados

William Jacobson

William B. Jacobson
Partner (Compliance Monitor for Braskem)
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP (USA)

Monitorships remain top of mind for the anti-corruption community in Brazil. Two years into the monitorships of Braskem and Odebrecht, the real question is whether (and how) the concept has been successful in Brazil. In this panel, a prosecutor and active monitors will explain what, in their respective views, are key indicators for a monitorship’s successes and missteps.
  • Key differences between monitorships in Brazil vs. the US: Expectations, conditions, criteria and selection of monitors, managing the process
  • What a “successful” monitorship looks like from the perspective of each party involved
  • Must-knows when reporting to Brazilian vs. US authorities
  • Nuances between a “traditional” compliance monitor vs. an “independent consultant”: Main differences companies ought to know
  • How to interpret the USDOJ’s memorandum on limiting monitorships to apply them to the most important cases: What can be expected
  • Reasons for some international monitorships, e.g. anti-corruption breaches (Braskem) vs. data issues (VW, Takata)
  • Monitorships in Brazil and the US: What comes next?