Meet Lisa Osofsky: Global cooperation as the way forward

Lisa Osofsky, Director of the UK’s Serious Fraud Office in London, UK

Lisa Osofsky was interviewed in December by Adam Turteltaub (adam.turteltaub@corporatecompliance.org), Vice President, Strategic Initiatives & International Programs at SCCE & HCCA.

AT: First, I think it would be good if you could give an overview of the remit of the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). I think most in compliance are aware of the role the SFO plays in prosecutions under the UK Bribery Act, but there’s more than that, of course.

LO: The SFO investigates and prosecutes the most complex fraud and bribery cases—specifically those that warrant the use of our multidisciplinary teams where prosecutors, investigators, financial analysts, and others work together throughout the life of the case. Our current docket is about 50% bribery cases and 50% fraud. That’s mostly investment fraud, misleading shareholders or markets, and, in some cases, fraud against the public purse. We aim to protect the reputation of the UK as a rule of law jurisdiction and a safe place to do business, as well as, of course, to bring criminals to justice.

AT: You became head of the office in August 2018. A lot of people were surprised that an American, albeit one who also has British citizenship, had become the head of the office. But looking back at your career, you bring a remarkable set of experiences to the role. In addition to work in the private sector, you worked as an assistant US attorney and as deputy general counsel at the FBI. What have you found to be similar in terms of approach of US prosecutors and the SFO?

LO: Public service values are the same all over the world, I think. We share high ethical standards and a commitment to justice excellence and the rule of law. We want to do the right thing and make the world a better place.

We also share—admittedly with private sector colleagues and adversaries as well as with each other—a competitive nature. We want to win!

AT: When it comes to the law, though, there are some key differences, including that it’s much more difficult in the UK to prosecute a corporation. I could see some arguing that there is less need for a compliance program. How would you respond to that?

LO: I would say that would be misguided and incorrect. First, a robust compliance program is good business: It enables the company to assess and manage its risks—reputational as well as operational. In this jurisdiction, it is especially critical when a company has committed an act of bribery and has argued that it has in place “adequate procedures” to prevent bribery (a defense under Section 7 of the UK Bribery Act). Further, there have been multiple studies showing that companies that have instituted a robust compliance program are more profitable. It is good for corporate culture to see that everyone is playing by the same rules and that infringements will be managed in a systematic and fair way. Finally, the Financial Conduct Authority requires robust systems and controls in the companies that it regulates, so having a healthy compliance program is not optional; it is required.

This document is only available to members. Please log in or become a member.


Would you like to read this entire article?

If you already subscribe to this publication, just log in. If not, let us send you an email with a link that will allow you to read the entire article for free. Just complete the following form.

* required field