World Bank Asset Recovery Handbook
(https://star.worldbank.org/star/sites/star/files/asset_recovery_handbook_0.pdf)
Page 179
BOX 9.1 Establishing Jurisdiction Where Limited Acts Have Occurred
in the Territory
It may appear to be difficult to establish jurisdiction in cases that do not involve
nationals and where only some of the elements of the offense are committed
in or against a particular jurisdiction. However, many jurisdictions have found
innovative ways to accomplish this. Here are some factors on which they have
focused:
• Financial transactions in the territory. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld
convictions of defendants who used interstate wires to execute a scheme
to defraud a foreign government of tax revenue.
• Origin of activities. In Brazil, a telephone call, fax, or e-mail emanating
from Brazil would be sufficient to establish jurisdiction over an act of foreign
bribery.
• Links to other crimes committed in the territory. In France, jurisdiction
can be established over crimes committed in a foreign jurisdiction if those
crimes can be linked to crimes committed in France.
• Transfers of national currency (even if outside the territory). In 2009,
the U.S. Department of Justice filed a confiscation action against bribery
proceeds paid (in Singapore, with U.S. currency) by a foreign company to
the son of the former prime minister of Bangladesh. The Department of
Justice successfully argued that the transfer of U.S. currency between
fi nancial institutions outside the United States necessarily transited through
U.S. correspondent banks. Also supporting the establishment of jurisdiction
was the fact that the foreign company making the bribe was registered
on the New York Stock Exchange and subject to U.S. laws and regulations.
