Is the Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO) decision to scale down its investigation into Rolls-Royce a well-informed move or a sign of panic? Aziz Rahman, senior partner at Rahman Ravelli, considers the SFO’s position
The SFO has finally stopped investigating a number of former Rolls-Royce employees in connection with the bribery and corruption scandal that has been rumbling on for many years.
A shrewd decision based on available evidence? Or the frightened actions of an organisation that appears to be treading a tightrope, especially considering the mauling it took in court just a matter of weeks ago on another high-profile investigation? Neither option can be ruled out. But questions need to be asked about the SFO’s handling of Rolls-Royce.
Two years ago, the SFO entered into a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) with Rolls-Royce, with the company paying a total bill of £671m for bribery and corruption in at least seven countries. The DPA ensured that Rolls-Royce as a company was not prosecuted but it did not mean that individual staff members could not be charged.
