¹ Luhmann, Niklas, Funktionen und Folgen formaler Organisation 304 (1964).Google Scholar

² Gottfredson, Michael R. & Hirschi, Travis, A General Theory of Crime (1990).Google Scholar

³ Nerdinger, Friedemann, Unternehmensschädigendes Verhalten erkennen und verhindern (2008); Tanja Rabl & Torsten M. Kühlmann, Understanding Corruption in Organizations—Development and Empirical Assessment of an Action Model, 82 J. Bus. Ethics 477 (2008); Ingo Zettler & Gerhard Blickle, Zum Zusammenspiel von “wer” und “wo”: Eine psychologische Betrachtungsweise personaler und situationaler Determinanten kontraproduktiven Verhaltens am Arbeitsplatz, 6 Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik 143 (2011).Google Scholar

⁴ Knecht, Thomas, Das Persönlichkeitsprofil des Wirtschaftskriminellen, 60 Kriminalistik 201 (2006); Thomas Knecht, Persönlichkeit von Wirtschaftskriminellen, 4 Psychiatrie 25 (2009).Google Scholar

⁵ See Litzcke, Sven, Ruth Linssen, Sina Maffenbeier & Jan Schilling, Korruption: Risikofaktor Mensch: Wahrnehmung—Rechtfertigung—Meldeverhalten 19, 20 (2012).Google Scholar

⁶ See, e.g., Blake E. Ashforth et al., Re-Viewing Organizational Corruption, 33 Acad. Mgm't Rev. 670, 672 (2008).Google Scholar

⁷ Hardoon, Deborah & Heinrich, Finn, Bribe Payers Index Report 2011, Transparency International 15 (2011), available at http://issuu.com/transparencyinternational/docs/bribe_payers_index_2011/15?e=2496456/2293452.Google Scholar

⁸ Braithwaite, John, White Collar Crime, 11 Ann. Rev. Soc. 1 (1985); Gilbert Geis, The Case Study Method in Sociological Criminology, in A Case for the Case Study 200 (J. R. Feagin, A. M. Orum & G. Sjoberg eds., 1991); David Friedrichs, Trusted Criminals: White Collar Crime in Contemporary Society (2007).Google Scholar

⁹ Stolle, Wulf, Global Brand Management 7 (2013); Mirka C. Wilderer, Transnationale Unternehmen zwischen heterogenen Umwelten und interner Flexibilisierung 257, 258 (2010).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Bundeskriminalamt, , Bundeslagebild der Korruption (2013), available at http://www.bka.de/nn_193376/DE/Publikationen/JahresberichteUndLagebilder/Korruption/korruption__node.html?__nnn=true (last visited Nov. 5, 2015).Google Scholar

¹¹ Dell'Osso, Vincenzo, Empirical Features of International Bribery Practice: Evidence from Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement Actions, in Preventing Corporate Corruption 236 (Stefano Manacorda et al. eds., 2014).Google Scholar

¹² Id. Google Scholar

¹³ Williams, James W. & Beare, Margaret E., The Business of Bribery: Globalization, Economic Liberalization, and the “Problem” of Corruption, 32 Crime, L. & Soc. Change 115 (1999).Google Scholar

¹⁴ Weismann, Miriam F., The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act: The Failure of the Self-Regulatory Model of Corporate Governance in the Global Business Environment, 88 J. Bus. Ethics 615 (2009).Google Scholar

¹⁵ Sutherland, Edwin H., White-Collar Criminality, 5 Am. Soc. Rev. 1 (1940).Google Scholar

¹⁶ Id. at 11.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Rose-Ackerman, Susan, Corruption: A Study in Political Economy 191–93 (1978).Google Scholar

¹⁸ See Braithwaite, , supra note 8, at 1.Google Scholar

¹⁹ See Clinard, Marshall B. & Quinney, Richard, Criminal Behavior Systems: A Typology 188 (1973) (explaining corporate crime encompasses “offences committed by corporate officials for the corporation and the offences of the corporation itself”); see also Gary S. Green, Occupational Crime (1990) (describing occupational crime as relating to organizations only in terms of an opportunity structure that serves as the trigger for individual offences committed for private gain).Google Scholar

²⁰ Gottfredson, & Hirschi, , supra note 2; Nerdinger, supra note 3; Rabl & Kühlmann, supra note 3; Zettler & Blickle, supra note 3; Knecht, supra note 4.Google Scholar

²¹ See, e.g., Sutherland, Edwin H., White Collar Crime (1949); Marshall B. Clinard & Richard Quinney, Criminal Behavior Systems: A Typology (1973); Marshall B. Clinard & Peter C. Yeager, Corporate Crime (1980); Braithwaite, supra note 8, at 1; Wim Huisman & Gudrun Vande Walle, The Criminology of Corruption, in The Good Cause: Theoretical Perspectives on Corruption 115 (Gjalt Graaf et al. eds., 2010); Ronald C. Kramer, Corporate Crime: An Organizational Perspective, in White-Collar and Economic Crime: Multidisciplinary and Cross-National Perspectives 75 (Peter Wickman & Timothy Dailey eds., 1982).Google Scholar

²² Ziegleder, Diana, Business and Self-Regulation: Results from a Comparative Study on the Prevention of Economic Crime, 28 Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie 203 (2007).Google Scholar

²³ Wieland, Josef, Die Governance der Korruption, in Korruption: Unaufgeklärter Kapitalismus—Multidisziplinäre Perspektiven zu Funktionen und Folgen der Korruption 43 (2005).Google Scholar

²⁴ Wieland, Josef, Die Kunst der Compliance, in Wirtschaftskriminalität und Ethik 155 (Albert Löhr & Eckhard Burkatzki eds., 2008).Google Scholar

²⁵ Ashforth, Blake E. & Anand, Vikas, The Normalization of Corruption in Organizations, 25 Res. Organizational Behav. 1 (2003).Google Scholar

²⁶ Ashforth, et al., supra note 6.Google Scholar

²⁷ Graeff, Peter, Schröder, Karenina & Wolf, Sebastian, Der Korruptionsfall Siemens, Analysen und praxisnahe Folgerungen des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitskreises von Transparency International Deutschland (2009).Google Scholar

²⁸ Daboub, Anthony J., Abdul, M. A. Rasheed, Richard L. Priem & Gray, David, Top Management Team Characteristics and Corporate Illegal Activity, 20 Acad. Mgm't Rev. 138 (1995).Google Scholar

²⁹ Simpson, Sally S. & Koper, Christopher S., The Changing of the Guard: Top Management Team Characteristics, Organizational Strain, and Antitrust Offending, 13 J. Quantitative Criminology 373 (1997).Google Scholar

³⁰ Id. Google Scholar

³¹ Id. at 394.Google Scholar

³² Graeff, Peter, Im Sinne des Unternehmens? Soziale Aspekte der korrupten Transaktionen im Hause Siemens, in Der Korruptionsfall Siemens: Analysen und praxisnahe Folgerungen des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitskreises von Transparency International Deutschland 151 (Peter Graeff, Karenina Schröder & Sebastian Wolf eds., 2009).Google Scholar

³³ Hiß, Stefanie, Warum übernehmen Unternehmen gesellschaftliche Verantwortung? Ein soziologischer Erklärungsversuch 17 (2006).Google Scholar

³⁴ Venard, Bertrand & Hanafi, Mohamed, Organizational Isomorphism and Corruption in Financial Institutions: Empirical Research in Emerging Countries, 81 J. Bus. Ethics 481, 495 (2008).Google Scholar

³⁵ Venard, Bertrand, Organizational Isomorphism and Corruption: An Empirical Research in Russia, 89 J. Bus. Ethics 59 (2009).Google Scholar

³⁶ Sung, Hung-En, Between Demand and Supply: Bribery in International Trade, 44 Crime, L. & Soc. Change 111 (2005).Google Scholar

³⁷ Id.; see also Wolf, Sebastian, Modernization of the German Anti-Corruption Criminal Law by International Legal Provisions, 7 German L.J. 785 (2006).Google Scholar

³⁸ See Pinto, Jonathan, Leana, Carrie R. & Pil, Frits K., Corrupt Organizations or Organizations of Corrupt Individuals? Two Types of Organization-Level Corruption, 33 Acad. Mgmt. Rev. 685, 688 (2008).Google Scholar

³⁹ Lessig, Lawrence, Institutional Corruptions 5 (Edmond J. Safra Ctr. for Ethics, Working Paper No. 1, 2013).Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Meyer, John W. & Rowan, Brian, Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony, 83 Am. J. of Soc. 340 (1977); Paul J. DiMaggio & Walter W. Powell, The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields, 48 Am. Soc. Rev. 147 (1983); Markus Pohlmann & Hristina Markova, Soziologie der Organisation: Eine Einführung 54 (2011).Google Scholar

⁴¹ Meyer, & Rowan, , supra note 40.Google Scholar

⁴² Luhmann, , supra note 1, at 304.Google Scholar

⁴³ Id. Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Id. Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Id. at 305.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Klinkhammer, Julian, On the Dark Side of the Code: Organizational Challenges to an Effective Anti-Corruption Strategy, 60 Crime, L. & Soc. Change 191 (2013).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Simpson, & Koper, , supra note 29; Diane Vaughan, Toward Understanding Unlawful Organizational Behavior, 80 Mich. L. Revi. 1377 (1982).Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Pohlmann, Markus, Management und Moral, in Integrierte Soziologie: Perspektiven zwischen Ökonomie und Soziologie, Praxis und Wissenschaft 161 (Tobias Blank et al. eds., 2008); Pohlmann & Markova, supra note 40.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Balán, Manuel, Competition by Denunciation: The Political Dynamics of Corruption Scandals in Argentina and Chile, 43 Comp. Pol. 459, 463 (2011).Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Id. at 459.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Guillan-Montero, Aranzazu, As If: The Fiction of Executive Accountability and the Persistence of Corruption Networks in Weakly Institutionalized Presidential Systems. Argentina (1989-2007) 30, 196 (2011); Michael Johnston, Corruption, Contention and Reform: The Power of Deep Democratization 20 (2013).Google Scholar

⁵² Klinkhammer, Julian, Varieties of Corruption in the Shadow of Siemens. A Modus-Operandi Study of Corporate Crime on the Supply Side of Corrupt Transactions, in The Routledge Handbook of White-Collar and Corporate Crime in Europe 318 (Judith Van Erp, Wim Huisman & Gudrun Vande Walle eds., 2015).Google Scholar

⁵³ United States v. Sharef, No. 1:11-CR-01056 at 14, indictment filed (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 12, 2011), http://www.scribd.com/doc/75578125/DOJ-Indictment-Against-Former-Siemens-Executives-and-Agents [hereinafter Indictment].Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Id. at 22, 32.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Id. at 18.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Id. at 22.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Pohlmann, , supra note 40.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Klinkhammer, , supra note 46; Pohlmann & Markova, supra note 40.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ The corrupt practices undermined both the procedural rules set by the International Chamber of Commerce (an international NGO) as well as the “procedural culture” of the respective jurisdiction. Joe Tirado, Matthew Page & Daniel Meagher, Corruption Investigations by Governmental Authorities and Investment Arbitration: An Uneasy Relationship, 29 Int'l Centre for Settlement of Investment Disp. Rev. 493 (2014); Search for “Truth” in Arbitration: Is Finding the Truth What Dispute Resolution Is About 77 (Marcus Wirth, Christina Rouvinez & Joachim Knoll eds., 2011).Google Scholar

⁶⁰ U.S. S.E.C. v. Sharef, No. 11-Civ.-09073, at 10, 11 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 13 2011).Google Scholar

⁶¹ See Indictment, , supra note 53; Sutherland, supra note 15; Weismann, supra note 14.Google Scholar

⁶² See Jury Trial Demand at 8, 9, U.S. S.E.C. v. Sharef, No. 11-9073 924 F. Supp. 2d 539 (S.D.N.Y. 2013), https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2011/comp22190.pdf.Google Scholar

⁶³ Id. at 14.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Id. at 14–15.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Id. at 47.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Klinkhammer, , supra note 46, at 202.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ See, Pinto, Leana, & Pil, supra note 38; Klinkhammer, supra note 46.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Indictment, supra note 53, at 5–7.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Id. at 3.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ The judge who dismissed the case against Uriel S. asserted procedural errors of the prosecution and argued that middle managers downplayed their own part by shifting the blame to superiors. See Cornelia Knust, Richterin macht Sharef-Ankläger lächerlich, Handelsblatt, May 30, 2014, available at http://www.handelsblatt.com/unternehmen/industrie/siemens-prozess-richterin-macht-sharef-anklaeger-laecherlich/9970032.html (last visited Mar. 6, 2015).Google Scholar

⁷¹ Siemens, AG, Legal Proceedings Q4 FY 2012, 3 (2012).Google Scholar

⁷² Luhmann, , supra note 1, at 304.Google Scholar

⁷³ Pohlmann, , supra note 48.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Pohlmann, & Markova, , supra note 40.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Klinkhammer, , supra note 52.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Telekom, Magyar, Annual Report (2007).Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Id. at 10.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Id. at 10, 16.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) at para. A–4, 13–14, U.S. v. Magyar Telekom, Plc., No. 11 Cr. 597 (E.D. Va. Dec. 29, 2011).Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Id. at para. A–7, 22.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Id. at para. A–8, 25c.Google Scholar

⁸² Financial Supervisory Authority of Hungary, National Bureau of Investigation of Hungary, Public Prosecutor's Office of Macedonia, Supreme State Prosecutor of Montenegro, Central Investigative Chief Prosecutor's Office of Hungary, Bonn Public Prosecutor's Office of Germany. See Trace International, Trace Compendium Magyar Telekom (2015).Google Scholar

⁸³ Telekom, Magyar, Magyar Telekom Group Code of Ethics (2005), available at https://web.archive.org/web/20051224144340/ http://www.magyartelekom.hu/english/aboutmagyartelekom/su stainability/main.vm (last visited Jan. 26, 2015).Google Scholar

⁸⁴ Luhmann, , supra note 1.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Klinkhammer, Julian, Korruption powered bei Siemens, in Neue Werte in den Führungsetagen? Kontinuität und Wandel in der Wirtschaftselite 136 (Markus Pohlmann & Georg Lämmlin eds., 2011); Pohlmann & Markova, supra note 48.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ See para. 26d, U.S. v. Magyar Telekom, Plc., No. 11 Cr. 597 (E.D. Va. Dec. 29, 2011).Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Complaint, S.E.C.ß v. Elek S., Andras B., and Tamas M., No. 11 Civ. 96459, 21 F. Supp. 2d 244 (S.D.N.Y. 2013) [hereinafter Complaint].Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Id. at 32.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ DPA, supra note 79, at para. A–7, 24.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Vetter, Reinhold, Elek Straub: Der heimliche Star der Telekom, Handelsblatt (Apr. 5, 2002), available at http://www.handelsblatt.com/archiv/der-57-jaehrige-ist-chef-der-ungarischen-matav-elek-straub-der-heimliche-star-der-telekom/2155012.html (last visted Mar. 6, 2015).Google Scholar

⁹¹ The aspect of absolute secrecy is particularly evident in the following quotes: “At a meeting at the Holiday Inn in Skopje, Magyar Telekom Executive 2 [Andras B.], Magyar Telekom Executive 3 [Tamas M.], Greek Intermediary 2, Greek Intermediary 3, and various Macedonian officials discussed the Protocol of Cooperation and agreed to keep the existence and purpose of the agreement from others, including Magyar Telekom's auditors and the public.” See Information, supra note 86, at para. 26b.Google Scholar

⁹² As stated in the documents of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia: “The only executed copies of the two secret Protocols of Cooperation with the government officials were retained by Greek Intermediary 1, and the existence and true purpose of the agreements were unknown to anyone within Magyar Telekom and DT [Deutsche Telekom] other than Magyar Telekom Executive 1 [Elek S.], Magyar Telekom Executive 2 [Andras B.], and a relatively small number of additional participants.” See Information, supra note 86, at para. 30.Google Scholar

⁹³ Jancsis, David, Imperatives in Informal Organizational Resource Exchange in Central Europe, J. of Eurasian Stud. 1 (2014).Google Scholar

⁹⁴ DPA, supra note 79, at A–6, 20 (emphasis added).Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Id. at A–8, 27 (emphasis added).Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Complaint, , supra note 87, at 9, 29 (emphasis added).Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Id. at 19, 66 (emphasis added).Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Id. at 20, 68 (emphasis added).Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Telekom, Deutsche, Press Releases (Sep. 26, 2000), available at http://www.telekom.hu/about_us/press_room/press_releases/2000/september_26 (last visited Mar. 6, 2015).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ SEC, Report of Foreign Private Issuer (Dec. 5, 2006), available at http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/containers/fix049/1047564/000110465906079414/a06-25043_26k.htm (last visited Oct. 16, 2015); Matáv Group, Annual Report, 13 (2004).Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ 15 U.S.C. § 78dd–1; DPA, supra note 79, at 1.Google Scholar

¹⁰² 15 U.S.C. §§ 78m(b)(2)(A), 78m(b)(5) & 78ff(a).Google Scholar

¹⁰³ DOJ, Press Release (Dec. 29, 2011), available at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/magyar-telekom-and-deutsche-telekom-resolve-foreign-corrupt-practices-act-investigation-and (last visited Oct. 16, 2015); Final Judgment, SEC v. Magyar Telekom, Plc. and Deutsche Telekom, AG, No. 11CIV9646 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 3, 2012).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ We compare the cases country-wise, even if they were tried as a whole before the court.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Carlos, S., the main financial intermediary for Siemens in Argentina, was omitted from this analysis because he was only loosely coupled to Siemens in terms of membership. He probably received about 7.5 million U.S. Dollars—but we do not know to which end, to personal or organizational gain. See La Nación (Dec. 27, 2013), http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1651137-el-caso-de-los-dni-procesan-a-17-directivos-de-siemens-por-el-pago-de-sobornos (last visited Mar. 6, 2015).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Koehler, Mike, The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act in a New Era (2014). Vincenzo Dell'Osso, Empirical Features of International Bribery Practice: Evidence from Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Enforcement Actions, in Preventing Corporate Corruption 204–07 (Stefano Manacorda et al. eds., 2014).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Palmer, Donald A., Normal Organizational Wrongdoing: A Critical Analysis of Theories of Misconduct in and by Organizations 31 (2012).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Pinto et al., supra note 38, 690; Thomas S. Bateman & Dennis W. Organ, Job Satisfaction and the Good Soldier: The Relationship between Affect and Employee “Citizenship,” 26 Acad. of Mgmt J. 587 (1983).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Lessig, , supra note 39, at 6.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Graeff, , supra note 32.Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Dombois, Rainer, Von organisierter Korruption zu individuellem Korruptionsdruck? Soziologische Einblicke in die Siemens-Korruptionsaffäre, in Der Korruptionsfall Siemen: Analysen und praxisnahe Folgerungen des wissenschaftlichen Arbeitskreises von Transparency International Deutschland 131 (Peter Graeff, Karenina Schröder & Sebastian Wolf eds., 2009).Google Scholar

¹¹² Dirk Tänzler, Konstadinos Maras & Angelos Giannakopoulos, The Social Construction of Corruption in Europe 1 (2012).Google Scholar

¹¹³ Meyer, & Rowan, , supra note 40; Powell & DiMaggio, supra note 40.Google Scholar