Question

Government allegation and prosecution of white collar crime is a major risk for corporations and management. Complying with all laws and regulations has never been more important.

(1) Criminal Liability explaining the two parts of a crime: the act or omission (actus reus) and the subjective state of mind (mens rea); (2) Individual Liability for Business Crimes explaining strict liability and the Park Doctrine. What are your thoughts about strict liability for corporate crimes? What does this mean for you as a corporate manager, officer, or director?

Answer 1

Criminal liability has two parts. In simple terms it means that two conditions need to be satisfied to constitute a criminal offense.

• Mind: The mental state or the mental intention to commit crime.
• Act: The act of crime such as execution of theft, fraud, murder etc.

However, strict liability refers to a condition where a person may be liable of criminal offense even if their mental intention is not proven. Just the act of criminal activity (irrespective of their intention) makes them liable.

For corporate crimes, it is understood that a person is of sound mental state to be working for a corporation. As a result, any actions committed by him/her was in sound state of mind. Also as a corporate workers employees are mostly aware of regulations and policies that are ethical and legal in nature. In spite of these education and knowledge of the system, if someone commits a crime, then it can be safely assumed that the person had the criminal intention. Thus, strict liability for corporate crime is a justified approach.

This means that as a corporate employee, it is important to keep in mind what constitutes as criminal offense and make sure that such incidents do not occur. Playing by the rule and guidelines are the safest way to operate in corporate environment.