In recent months, we have been witnessing significant changes in law enforcement efforts against bribery and corruption offenses, both in Israel and abroad. Although law enforcement trends among countries are not uniform, it appears that we may not witness a real change in the global enforcement environment, despite the dramatic change that is taking place in the United States.
A major event in this field, that received extensive media coverage was President Trump’s Executive Order issued on February 10, 2025, ordering a 180-day freeze on enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).
Pursuant to this Executive Order, no new investigations or enforcement actions will be initiated in the United States during the freeze period in respect of offenses of bribery of foreign public officials. In addition, the attorney-general is instructed to review all pending FCPA proceedings and take appropriate actions to “restore proper bounds on FCPA enforcement and preserve Presidential foreign policy prerogatives.” The Executive Order also instructs the Attorney-General to issue guidelines on the subject of the updated FCPA enforcement policy in order to ensure “American economic competitiveness with respect to other nations.”
This Executive Order could give the impression that the United States, traditionally regarded as the global standard-bearer in the anti-corruption and anti-bribery enforcement efforts, is now adopting a more lenient approach, which could prompt a decline in anti-corruption and anti-bribery efforts in the international arena. However, we might see the opposite trend, whereby other countries, which recently stepped up law enforcement measures against bribery and corruption offenses, will take action to fill the law enforcement vacuum created by the United States in this regard.
For example, the State of Israel is signaling its intention to continue—and even intensify—its efforts in the field:
- On March 19, 2025, a draft bill to amend the International Legal Assistance Law was submitted to the Knesset for second and third readings. This draft bill proposes to expand authorities to confiscate and freeze assets of Israelis who are suspected, or have been convicted, of an offense in a foreign country. Currently, when a criminal proceeding is underway against an Israeli in a foreign country in respect of particular offenses, including fraud, breach of trust and money laundering (which could also be linked to a bribery offense), the foreign country can only ask Israel to confiscate property that is related to the offense. The bill is proposing to also enable confiscations of property at a corresponding value, even if not necessarily related to the offense.
This draft bill is an attempt by Israel to align itself with international standards in the field of combatting financial crimes, particularly considering the audit report of the Financial Action Task Force (of which Israel is a member). The audit report found that Israel’s current legislation does not enable it to confiscate assets at corresponding value within the framework of providing international legal assistance, which is a deficiency that should be addressed with high priority. The FATF is expected to conduct an audit in this regard this month (May 2025).
- The draft bill to amend this legislation is also in line with Israel’s ramped up law enforcement efforts against bribery and corruption, which is also reflected in Israel’s rise in the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index. Israel was ranked 30th in 2024 out of the 180 examined countries, compared to a 33rd place in 2023. This means, that according to experts in the field, the level of corruption in Israel has decreased over the past year.
- Within these contexts, it is also important to note that one of the most prominent examples of the increased law enforcement by the Israeli authorities against bribery and corruption offenses in the international commercial arena, was concluded in October 2024. In this case, Shikun & Binui’s subsidiary, SBI Infrastructures, was convicted and sentenced for the bribery offenses it committed through cash payments without receipts to foreign public officials in Africa. The court approved a plea agreement whereby SBI Infrastructures admitted to the crime of conspiring to continue paying improper payments and to reporting offenses pursuant to the Israeli Securities Law (it reported bribery payments under “cost of work” in Africa). The company was fined ILS 10 million, and property of its subsidiary, SBI Switzerland, was confiscated to the value of ILS 250 million. The company’s conviction came a few months after senior executives in the Group were sentenced in that same case to incarceration and adjudged to pay heavy fines.
We see similar trends in other countries, including increased law enforcement efforts, tighter international cooperation, as well as the promotion of technological, legislative, and bureaucratic improvements:
- For example, on April 3, 2025, the UK Attorney-General’s Serious Fraud Office published a work plan for 2025-2026, which includes strategic initiatives and changes designed to increase law enforcement measures against fraud, bribery and corruption offenses. Among the planned measures is the legislation of a new offense – “failure to prevent fraud” – whereby any corporation that cannot prove that it took reasonable measures to prevent fraud by its employees or business partners could be held criminally liable – even if the management had not been directly involved in the fraud. The work plan also adds financial incentives and more formal protections to whistleblowers, as well as improved technological capabilities in investigating fraud using cryptographic assets.
- On March 20, 2025, the prosecution offices of the United Kingdom, France and Switzerland announced the establishment of the International Anti-corruption Prosecutorial Task Force. The Task Force’s aim is to deepen the cooperation between these countries in tackling international corruption cases and enable more effective coordination when conducting investigations and enforcement proceedings, while calling on other countries to join them.
Even in the United States itself, it is evident that there is willingness to find alternative solutions to federal enforcement of the FCPA:
- In response to the Executive Order, various state prosecutors issued statements clarifying that the Executive Order does not restrict law enforcement actions against bribery and corruption through state rather than federal laws. For example, the California state attorney-general issued a clarification to the public that bribery is prohibited under California state laws, and therefore, even if enforcement of the FCPA is suspended, state law enforcement agencies can still take action against corruption and bribery. Similarly, the New York state attorney-general also declared that his office has the power to prosecute local bribery and corruption crimes. It is important to note in this regards, that other federal laws also enable prosecution of acts of corruption in one way or another.
- Moreover, even with regard to pending proceedings – considering that the Executive Order instructs the attorney-general’s office to review whether they should be pursued in light of the new policy – it appears that the federal attorney-general’s office is deciding to pursue criminal proceedings in quite a few instances. At the same time, this policy is not uniform, and the federal attorney-general’s office has decided not to pursue some investigations and enforcement actions because pursuing them would be inconsistent with the United States’ interests in light of the new Executive Order.
These events indicate that law enforcement actions against bribery and corruption offenses will not necessarily decrease as a result of the US Executive Order but may reshape them. Although President Trump’s Executive Order has created some vacuum in the US arena, it appears that it is already being filled by corresponding laws, alternative regulations and by other countries’ stepped-up anti-corruption measures. This trend is reflected in the deepening of international cooperation, the use of advanced technologies and structural and legal measures being taken to ensure continuing anti-corruption efforts in the global arena.