Lex Mundi Global Anti-Corruption Compliance Guide |
|
Norway |
|
|
(Europe)
Firm
Advokatfirmaet Thommessen AS
Contributors
Andreas Meidell |
|
| What is the key anti-bribery and corruption legislation in your jurisdiction? | Sections 387, 388 and 389 of the Norwegian Penal Code 2005 as amended from time to time (the “Penal Code”) contains the key anti-bribery provisions under Norwegian law. |
| Has there been a specific anti-bribery and corruption law enacted in your jurisdiction in the last ten years? | No. However, the anti-bribery provisions in the Penal Code entered into force on October 1, 2015. |
| Is a bribe payment to domestic government officials prohibited by the legislation? | Yes. The Norwegian corruption legislation does not distinguish between foreign public officials and domestic public officials. Due to the fact that the Norwegian corruption legislation covers all types of employment, office or assignment for public and private employers and principals, there is no definition of a ‘public official’ within the framework of the Penal Code. |
| Is a bribe payment to foreign government officials prohibited by the legislation? | Yes. The Norwegian corruption legislation does not distinguish between foreign public officials and domestic public officials. However, Norwegian anti-corruption legislation states that improper advantage must be requested, received, promised, given or offered in connection with a position, office or assignment. The terms ‘position’, ‘office’ and ‘assignment’ are meant to include all types of employment, office or assignment for public and private employers and principals, regardless of the level of position. It is clearly expressed in the Penal Code (both ss. 387, paragraph 2 and 389 paragraph 2) that position, office or assignment also means position, office or assignment in a foreign country. |
| Is requesting or accepting a bribe prohibited by the legislation? | According to Norwegian law, offering or giving a bribe (active bribery) as well as requesting for or receiving a bribe (passive bribery) is prohibited. |
| Who is subject to the legislation? | The provisions on the applicability of the Norwegian anti-corruption rules are quite complex. However, as a starting point, it can be said that the rules apply to all acts of corruption committed in Norway, as well as acts of corruption committed abroad, provided that there is a sufficient Norwegian nexus. |
| Is there criminal liability for corporate entities who have either paid or accepted a bribe payment? | Yes. Companies, as well as individuals, can be held liable for bribery according to the Norwegian Penal Code. According to the Norwegian Penal Code chapter 4, s.27, an enterprise can be liable to a penalty if a provision of the Penal Code is violated by a person who acted on behalf of the enterprise. The term ‘enterprise’ means in this respect a company, society or other association, sole proprietorship, foundation, estate or public activity. |
| What is the penalty for individuals violating the law? | According to Section 387 of the Penal Code, the penalty for corruption is fines or imprisonment of up to three years. However, the penalty for gross corruption is fines or imprisonment of up to ten years (Section 388 of the Penal Code). Finally, Section 389 of the Penal Code provides that trading in influence may lead to fines or imprisonment of up to three years. |
| Assuming corporate entities are liable for violating the legislation, what is the penalty for corporate entities violating the law? | A corporate entity may be sentenced to (i) fines; (ii) restrictions on conducting its business; or (iii) restrictions on operating in a particular form/way, as well as confiscation. |
| Assuming corporate entities are liable for violating the legislation, does having a compliance program designed to prevent bribery constitute a defense? | Having a compliance program is an important defense for companies being liable for violating Norwegian anti-corruption law. Depending on the facts of the matter, the company's anti-corruption program may help reduce or avoid the potential corporate fine. However, having a good compliance program is no absolute defense against punishment, as there is no rule in Norwegian law stating that a company cannot be punished provided their compliance system is sufficient. |
| Assuming corporate entities are liable for violating the anticorruption law, is it possible for a corporate entity to reach a deferred prosecution agreement or leniency agreement with the enforcement authorities? | Norwegian law does not have a formalized system for deferred prosecution agreements or leniency agreements in cases where anti-corruption provisions have been breached by someone on behalf of a company. However, it is possible for the police to offer (and this is usually done) an optional fine to the company as an alternative to going to court, and the optional fine may then be accepted by the company without acknowledging any guilt. This, to a certain degree, has similarities to a deferred prosecution agreement, and there will often be some form of negotiation between the police and the company before the optional writ is offered. Also, with regard to leniency agreements, cooperation with the Norwegian police under the investigation will as a starting point lead to a lesser fine for the company and is an important factor for both the police and the court, when deciding on the size of the optional fine, or the size of the sentencing fine provided the case goes to court before a judge. |
Lex Mundi Global Anti-Corruption Compliance Guide
Sections 387, 388 and 389 of the Norwegian Penal Code 2005 as amended from time to time (the “Penal Code”) contains the key anti-bribery provisions under Norwegian law.
No. However, the anti-bribery provisions in the Penal Code entered into force on October 1, 2015.
Yes. The Norwegian corruption legislation does not distinguish between foreign public officials and domestic public officials. Due to the fact that the Norwegian corruption legislation covers all types of employment, office or assignment for public and private employers and principals, there is no definition of a ‘public official’ within the framework of the Penal Code.
Yes. The Norwegian corruption legislation does not distinguish between foreign public officials and domestic public officials. However, Norwegian anti-corruption legislation states that improper advantage must be requested, received, promised, given or offered in connection with a position, office or assignment. The terms ‘position’, ‘office’ and ‘assignment’ are meant to include all types of employment, office or assignment for public and private employers and principals, regardless of the level of position. It is clearly expressed in the Penal Code (both ss. 387, paragraph 2 and 389 paragraph 2) that position, office or assignment also means position, office or assignment in a foreign country.
According to Norwegian law, offering or giving a bribe (active bribery) as well as requesting for or receiving a bribe (passive bribery) is prohibited.
The provisions on the applicability of the Norwegian anti-corruption rules are quite complex. However, as a starting point, it can be said that the rules apply to all acts of corruption committed in Norway, as well as acts of corruption committed abroad, provided that there is a sufficient Norwegian nexus.
Yes. Companies, as well as individuals, can be held liable for bribery according to the Norwegian Penal Code.
According to the Norwegian Penal Code chapter 4, s.27, an enterprise can be liable to a penalty if a provision of the Penal Code is violated by a person who acted on behalf of the enterprise. The term ‘enterprise’ means in this respect a company, society or other association, sole proprietorship, foundation, estate or public activity.
According to Section 387 of the Penal Code, the penalty for corruption is fines or imprisonment of up to three years. However, the penalty for gross corruption is fines or imprisonment of up to ten years (Section 388 of the Penal Code). Finally, Section 389 of the Penal Code provides that trading in influence may lead to fines or imprisonment of up to three years.
A corporate entity may be sentenced to (i) fines; (ii) restrictions on conducting its business; or (iii) restrictions on operating in a particular form/way, as well as confiscation.
Having a compliance program is an important defense for companies being liable for violating Norwegian anti-corruption law. Depending on the facts of the matter, the company's anti-corruption program may help reduce or avoid the potential corporate fine. However, having a good compliance program is no absolute defense against punishment, as there is no rule in Norwegian law stating that a company cannot be punished provided their compliance system is sufficient.
Norwegian law does not have a formalized system for deferred prosecution agreements or leniency agreements in cases where anti-corruption provisions have been breached by someone on behalf of a company. However, it is possible for the police to offer (and this is usually done) an optional fine to the company as an alternative to going to court, and the optional fine may then be accepted by the company without acknowledging any guilt. This, to a certain degree, has similarities to a deferred prosecution agreement, and there will often be some form of negotiation between the police and the company before the optional writ is offered. Also, with regard to leniency agreements, cooperation with the Norwegian police under the investigation will as a starting point lead to a lesser fine for the company and is an important factor for both the police and the court, when deciding on the size of the optional fine, or the size of the sentencing fine provided the case goes to court before a judge.