A former FIFA vice-president, Alfredo Hawit, pleaded guilty to corruption charges.
The Kyrgyz Prime Minister resigns days before the release of a parliamentary report into corruption within a road construction program from which he allegedly benefited. A Chinese road construction company is also implicated in the corruption.
Another former leader dealing with corruption allegations is the former Argentine President, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner
The NYPD corruption scandal drags on with more cops resigning or being reassigned.
Who would have thought that Frank Underwood of House of Cards would be an anti-corruption champion?
In an interesting twist on parental responsibility, Indian police have charged a father with abetment (According to the Indian Penal Code s.108-109, this is intentionally aiding, instigating or facilitating an offence) as well as culpable homicide after he lent his underage son his Mercedes and the son ran over a pedestrian while speeding.
There are problems with both charges. With respect to the culpable homicide charge, even if negligence on the part of the father is proved, can one prove that this caused the death? Here, although the father might have foreseen that his unlicensed minor would drive badly, there was still a voluntary, informed and deliberate act of another (his son) which arguably breaks the chain of causation that could link the father with the deadly accident. With respect to abetment, the police are evidently banking on the fact that the father knew that: (i) his son, a minor, was not allowed to drive and (ii) that the boy had been involved in a prior serious crash as a driver, in order to prove there was intentional abetment when daddy handed over his Mercedes. But much would depend on what offence in particular the father is alleged to have abetted. If it is abetting driving without a license then this is likely to be straightforward for the same reason that intentionally buying a child alcohol would be abetting underage drinking. If, however, it is offences that carry even heavier moral condemnation and culpability, it is more difficult to show that a father could have foreseen let alone intended his son to commit them at the point of giving permission to take the car. For example, it is harder to show that the father meant for his son to drive recklessly or dangerously; it is even harder to show that the father meant for his son to cause a death and facilitated, instigated or aided him by giving him the car. The indications are that the Indian courts will not be too receptive to this method of holding parents criminally liable. Furthermore, it is a fundamental principle of criminal law that every person of full mental capacity has a right to individual autonomy but is also individually responsible. The driver was a minor, but was not below the age of criminal responsibility. So holding the father responsible on behalf of his son for the death would violate a basic tenet of criminal law.
The European Arrest Warrant (EAW), a powerful and quick extradition tool based on mutual recognition of its validity throughout EU states, has been somewhat clipped by the Court of Justice for the European Union. The court has held that a transfer under the EAW can be delayed if there is a risk of inhumane or degrading jail conditions.
11 Korean brothel owners in New York are up on money laundering charges.
A former top Spanish banker is held on money laundering charges.