As documented in a number of case studies (from Telia Telecom in Sweden to Wirecard in Germany) in this book, recidivism seems to be of a substantial magnitude in corporate crime. Corporations tend ...to repeat white-collar offenses such as financial crime and environmental crime in various forms as long as they find it convenient. A minor fine from time to time and dismissal of some executives as scapegoats do not prevent corporations from committing and concealing new offenses as long as there is a convenient financial motive, a convenient organizational opportunity, and a convenient willingness for deviant behavior. Businesses and their executives tend to be recidivists who get away with light punishment in most jurisdictions. The relevant audiences for this book include law students, business students, sociology students, and criminology students. Fraud examiners, defense attorneys, compliance officers, police investigators, as well as prosecutors can find the structural model of convenience to be an ideal template in preparing corporate crime case narratives.
A defendant in criminal court should only be convicted if guilt is proven by the prosecution beyond any reasonable doubt. That is the burden of proof. Any doubt emerging should benefit the defendant. ...In this perspective, evidence from police investigations is challenged by defense lawyers to create sufficient doubt so that the defendant can be acquitted. In the current case study regarding prosecution of the former president at the International Biathlon Union, this article reviews defense lawyers’ attempts to create sufficient doubt regarding corruption to cause acquittal of the defendant. Evidence from police investigation in Austria and Norway ended up in competing narratives of the prosecution and the defense with the metaphor of the courtroom as a theater scene. In a policing and criminology perspective, this research is important as it documents the space of knowledge rivalry between prosecution and defense depending on the extent of convincing power found in the evidence that is resulting from police investigations.
The theory of convenience addresses white-collar and corporate crime. The theory is applied in this article to a case study of Norwegian publishing houses having to pay infringement fees because of ...competition act violation. Cartel members agreed and coordinated a boycott of a distribution channel. This article reviews the research literature on cartels before presenting the convenience case study. Combatting cartels is a matter of reducing the attractiveness and convenience of joining cartels. Guardianship, oversight, and controls are at the core of reducing deviance convenience. Detection is an element of oversight. However, detection is rare, as this case illustrated by email sent by mistake. Combatting cartels is a matter of control at the top of organizations where typically each chief executive officer (CEO) is involved. Therefore, the corporate compliance officer should never report to the CEO but rather to the chairperson on the board and to the external auditor.
Deferred prosecution agreements and similar arrangements are practiced in many countries when there is suspicion of corporate crime. It is an agreement based on a negotiation that permits the ...allegedly guilty party not to undergo a criminal trial if they avoid committing further wrongdoing for a specified period of time. This article reviews such agreements in light of two different situations where the corporation is actually guilty and where the corporation is actually not guilty. An innocent company signing such an agreement suffers from miscarriage of justice. A guilty company on the other hand can restore the convenience of committing corporate crime. This article argues that deferred prosecution agreements violate basic principles of justice. The research suggests that serious fraud offices and other public bodies need to be restored to enable complete criminal prosecution when there are suspicions of corporate wrongdoing. This suggestion is based on the assumption that the underlying problem is law enforcement incompetence at investigating and prosecuting corporate crime.
Norwegian law regulates and prohibits retaliation against whistle-blowers, but there is no conviction so far where a court passes a prison sentence because of such crime. Rather, victims of ...retaliation have to sue their employer for compensation if they suffer retaliation in the form of job loss or other consequences. This article starts by briefly reviewing literature on retaliation against whistle-blowers. Next, we distinguish between retaliation as concrete, individualized measures and retaliation as a coherent process over time. The process may start with ignorance, move into rejection, and finally sanctions. This article continues by presenting the case of two whistle-blowers in a Norwegian municipality who have experienced retaliation. Then, we apply incident-based and process-based retaliation measures by comparing classifications in groups and stages. This case study is a result of critical, provocative, and confrontational action research.
Many countries have established national authorities to investigate and prosecute serious and complex white-collar and corporate crime incidents. This article reviews research literature regarding ...external challenges and barriers for national agencies in Norway (Økokrim), New Zealand (SFO), the United Kingdom (SFO), and the Netherlands (OSF). The policing study in this article is important as it illustrates dilemmas that governments need to address when reviewing their national fraud offices and economic crime authorities. While Økokrim in Norway seems reluctant to prosecute too complex economic crime cases, the SFO in New Zealand attempts prevention of deinstitutionalization, the SFO in the UK might have deterrence effects, while the OSF in the Netherlands is challenged by the private industry of corporate investigators. These are some of the challenges and barriers facing national authorities that are charged with the tasks of investigating and prosecuting white-collar and corporate crime at the national level. The identified challenges and barriers especially related to the convenience theory perspective should enable future research to identify relevant actions.
When Russia attacked Ukraine, national states as well as multinational bodies such as the European Union imposed economic sanctions against Russia. Companies in sanctioning countries were expected to ...terminate their business with companies in the sanctioned country. However, the threat of bankruptcy made some companies chose deviance to circumvent and evasion sanctions. The case study in this paper describes an insurance firm’s attempt to terminate an insurance arrangement to avoid allegations of money laundering. The ownership of a seafood company in Norway had been transferred from Russians to a Norwegian. However, it seemed that the Russians were still the real owners since the Norwegian had paid nothing for the ownership. This paper presents the civil trial in the case and discusses convenience propositions for the Norwegian based on convenience theory in the dimensions of motive, opportunity, and willingness for deviance.
Half of all finance and insurance firms in Norway report that they are exposed to economic crime, particularly fraud, every year. On the other hand, only eighteen percent in public administration and ...defense perceive similar exposure to economic crime. However, the estimated fraction of unreported, non-registered economic crime in the country is ninety-four percent. These numbers are some of the results from surveys conducted in Norway in 2005, 2010, and 2023. This article applies the main economic crime categories of fraud, theft, manipulation, and corruption as used by scholars to study the survey results. The corruption category shows the largest gap between perceived exposure and police statistics. Comparison to white-collar crime research indicates higher frequency of theft at the street level and higher frequency of manipulation at the upper echelon. Comparison to future surveys in other countries is encouraged.
One reason many nations have centralized policing functions is to manage knowledge that can take on and solve the most complex criminal investigations and prosecutions in the country. Somewhat ...similar to the Serious Fraud Office in the United Kingdom and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the United States, the National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime (Økorim) is Norway’s central unit for fighting economic and environmental crime. After a scandal hit this national authority, the current research asks to what extent Økokrim is still a serious economic crime office. An empirical study of press releases from the national authority over a one year period, from June 2022 to June 2023, suggests that Økokrim has taken on less serious economic crime cases to close the competence gap between the requirements of new criminal cases and the qualifications among Økokrim employees and leaders. The consequence seems to be that from an estimated conviction rate of 1 out of 11 white-collar offenders in Norway in the past, less than 9 % are now brought to justice. This article contributes to the current state of knowledge regarding offender convenience depending on operations and policy choices of centralized crime agencies.
The theoretical goal of this article is to examine the case of a recent benefits fraud scandal among Norwegian parliamentarians, who received various payments they were not entitled to, through the ...lens of convenience theory. The evidence presented and evaluated comes from the report of the Norwegian auditor general’s internal investigation as well as from various media reports. Among 14 convenience propositions, evidence was found for six of them: greed, status, decay, chaos, justification, and neutralization. An important practical implication of this research is that the independent status of parliamentarians has to be addressed by new measures of guardianship, overview, and control against fraud. Generally, the violation of trust by privileged individuals elected by the people represents a threat to democracy.
