United States: Inter-Agency Cooperation Not So Compelling? The Implications Of US V Allen

Last Updated: May 17 2018
Article by Laura Cooke and Francesca Morley

As cross-border enforcement investigations become more prevalent, the decision by the United States Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit in US v Allen, on 19 July last year, to reverse two convictions related to LIBOR manipulation, due to the use of compelled testimony obtained by a foreign agency, raises serious questions regarding inter-agency co-operation going forward.

The Second Circuit held that Fifth Amendment's right against self-incrimination in US criminal proceedings will apply when a foreign power has obtained the compelled testimony in question and that a high burden is placed upon the US government agency in question to prove that such testimony has not been tainted.

In November 2017, the Second Circuit denied the US government's petition for panel rehearing, or alternatively "rehearing en banc". This decision is now a binding precedent in the Second Circuit.

Use of Compelled Testimony

The Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits the use of a defendant's compelled testimony in criminal proceedings against them. However, as established in Kastigar v United States 406 U.S 441 (1972), the government can compel a witness to testify only if "direct use" and "derivative use" immunity is granted.1

Investigations and Convictions

In November 2015, Anthony Allen and Anthony Conti, employees of Cooperative Centrale Raiffeisen-Boerenleenbank B.A. ("Rabobank") were convicted in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud, and several counts of wire fraud in relation to the manipulation of the benchmark rate LIBOR.

Both Messrs Allen and Conti, along with other Rabobank employees, were investigated in both the US and UK for their involvement in the setting of LIBOR. During 2013, the Financial Conduct Authority ("FCA") conducted interviews with the various individuals in circumstances where a refusal to testify risked severe penalties under section 165 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. The individuals were granted direct use immunity.

During the LIBOR investigation the Department of Justice implemented safeguards to ensure that the investigation being conducted by the FCA did not taint its own investigation. For example, each body conducting its own interviews with the DoJ interviewing individuals prior to the FCA.

Following the conclusion of the interviews the FCA brought an action against one Rabobank employee, Paul Robson, although this was subsequently stayed for unknown reasons to allow the Department of Justice ("DoJ") to pursue its action. In line with the FCA's procedures, Mr Robson was provided with the evidence against him, which included the compelled testimony of Messer Allen and Conti, and allowed to review that evidence.

During April 2014, Robson was charged with wire fraud in the US. Shortly after the indictment, Mr Robson pleaded guilty and entered into a co-operation agreement with the DoJ. In October 2014, following new information obtained from Robson and presented by the FBI, Messrs Allen and Conti were charged with conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud along with several counts of wire fraud.

Despite attempts by Messrs Allen and Conti to either dismiss the charges or Mr Robson's evidence from the trial on the grounds that his testimony was based upon his review of their compelled evidence in the FCA investigation, the District Court decided to address such issues following the conclusion of the trial. Mr Robson testified at their trial and Messrs Allen and Conti were found guilty of a total of nineteen charges.

District Court Hearing

A two-day hearing took place in December 2015. It came to light during this hearing that, while reviewing the evidence provided to Mr Robson by the FCA, he had also annotated and made notes on the compelled testimonies of Messrs Allen and Conti. The District Court found that Mr Robson's review of the compelled testimony "did not taint the evidence he later provided, because the Government has shown an independent source for such evidence" citing Mr Robson's personal experience and observations.

Second Circuit Appeal

The appeal to the Second Circuit focused on the issue of "whether testimony given by an individual involuntarily under the legal compulsion of a foreign power may be used against the individual in a criminal case in an American court".

In reversing the District Court's decision, the Court held that:

  • the Fifth Amendment's prohibition on compelled testimony in US criminal proceedings applies even when the testimony has been compelled by a foreign power;
  • in situations where the government makes use of a witness who has been exposed to a defendant's compelled testimony, the burden is placed upon the US government to prove that the compelled testimony "did not shape, alter, or affect the evidence used by the government" as required under Kastigar. It is not sufficient for a witness to issue a denial that their testimony has been tainted in situations where a witness "materially altered" their testimony after being "substantially exposed" to the defendant's compelled testimony.

As such, the Court considered that the government had not discharged its burden and the compelled evidence of Messrs Allen and Conti had been used against them in the criminal proceedings in violation of the Fifth Amendment's right against self-incrimination.

It is common practice for enforcement agencies to obtain testimony through compelled testimony. The Second Circuit was at pains to point out that it was not prescribing how agencies, in the UK or elsewhere, should conduct their investigations.

Decision to Dismiss Petition

Given the potential impact of the Second Circuit's July 2017 decision, the US government filed a petition for the panel to revisit its decision on the basis that it impaired its ability to investigate and pursue convictions. Notably, it highlighted that certain cross-border investigations had not been pursued in light of the Second Circuit's decision.

In November 2017, the Second Circuit denied the petition. There was debate as to whether the US government would take this issue to the Supreme Court. However, according to reports, following two extensions to the deadline to file a request for the Supreme Court to review the decision by 6 April 2018, no request had been filed. Subject to a request for the court to consider a late petition, the decision remains a binding precedent.


This decision will have a significant impact upon the how US government agencies interact with their foreign counterparts in cross-border enforcement investigations, as highlighted in its recent petition. As cross-border enforcement investigations become increasingly commonplace in our regulatory landscape, US government agencies will see heightened focus on co-ordination of parallel investigations, arguably more so when the US is looking to prosecute non-US conduct.

As noted by the Second Circuit, despite the fact that the DoJ had implemented procedures to ensure that evidence was not tainted by the parallel investigations, these safeguards were not sufficient in view of the way in which the testimony came before the Court in this case. In light of Allen, regulatory agencies will need to adapt and may seek to collaborate with foreign enforcement agencies at an earlier stage of investigations and agree as to how to proceed with its respective investigations with potential impact on the timing and direction of the investigation.

This decision will provide comfort to individuals involved in cross-border enforcement actions who are compelled to testify that such testimony, either the statements themselves or information derived from such statements, will not be used against them in US criminal proceedings. The decision raises broader questions about the processes that will be used to obtain information in cases with the potential for cross-border regulatory action going forward. It remains to be seen whether the use by regulatory agencies, such as the FCA and SFO, of their wide-ranging powers to interview under powers of compulsion is shaped by the decision.

The impact of this decision is already being seen in the Courts. In the LIBOR manipulation case of US v Connolly, the defendants, Messrs Connolly and Black who are former Deutsche Bank traders, have contested the use of compelled testimony obtained by the FCA during an interview with Mr Black. The hearing is scheduled to take place at the end of April 2018.

The LIBOR convictions continue to gain headlines in the media. The overturning of the convictions of the two former Rabobank employees comes as the Criminal Cases Review Commission in the UK has announced that it is reviewing the convictions of former UBS employee Tom Hayes (serving an 11 year sentence) and former Barclays employee Jonathan Mathew (serving a 4 year sentence). Another individual, Alex Pabon, a former Barclays trader, convicted in the LIBOR manipulation actions had his appeal dismissed by the Court of Appeal in March 2018.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions