Search for:
Author

Fernando Goldaracena

Browsing
Fernando Goldaracena is a partner in Baker McKenzie Buenos Aires Office. He heads the White Collar Crime Practice Group and is a member of the Compliance & Investigations Practice Group. Prior to joining the Firm, Fernando served as secretary of the Federal Criminal Court No. 2 of San Isidro, where he led several criminal investigations ranging from white collar crimes, public corruption and tax fraud. He is member of both the Compliance & Money Laundering and the Criminal Law Practice Groups of the City of Buenos Aires Bar Association (Colegio de Abogados de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires).

On 8 January 2024, the Financial Information Unit (UIF for its Spanish abbreviation) issued Resolution No. 1/2023, establishing minimum requirements for the identification, evaluation, monitoring, management, and mitigation of money laundering and terrorist financing risks applicable to persons or legal entities that perform remittances within and outside Argentina. The Resolution is aligned with prior resolutions issued by the UIF for other regulated entities. Accordingly, the Resolution changes the approach from formal regulatory compliance to a risk-based approach.

By means of Resolution PGN No. 92/23, acting Attorney General Eduardo Casal established performance criteria for representatives of the Prosecutor’s Office (PO) to set the performance standards of the PO in conciliatory proceedings between the accused and the victims of crimes in criminal cases.

The Resolution establishes that: (1) the intervention of the PO in the process corresponding to the conciliation agreement is necessary to ensure legality and to ensure the interests of society; (2) the prosecutor shall oppose any conciliation agreement that disregards normative and international regulatory mandates (treaties and supranational conventions); (3) prosecutors may argue criminal policy reasons (prior convictions, previous agreements, probation or multiplicity of crimes) to oppose and/or not consent to the agreement; (4) representatives of the PO must ensure the agile and informal participation of victims; and (5) conciliation agreements may be entered into before the indictment control hearing, closing of the investigation, and/or the elevation to trial.

Pursuant to Resolution MPF-SI No. 8/22, dated 27 December 2022, the district attorney of the Prosecutor’s Office (MPF) of the province of Buenos Aires created the Specialized Prosecutor Unit for the Investigation of Cybercrime (UFECI), which will have jurisdiction throughout the judicial department of San Isidro (composed of the localities of Pilar, San Fernando, San Isidro, Tigre and Vicente López). The UFECI was created to address, in a more efficient and successful way, investigations related to highly complex criminal maneuvers.

On 25 April 2022, the Anti-Corruption Office approved the System for Monitoring Private and Public Activities Before and After the Exercise of Public Function, with the purpose of collating and verifying compliance with public ethics regulations of individuals who enter and leave high-ranking public positions in the National Executive Branch.

In this edition of the anti-bribery and anti-corruption review, you will find an incisive overview of the legal and regulatory frameworks established to combat white-collar crime in major jurisdictions. With a focus on the practical implications of recent enforcement trends and policies, our lawyers examine key issues such as domestic and foreign bribery, associated offenses including money laundering, and best practices for internal compliance programs.

Argentina | October 6 2018 The Anticorruption Office Resolution 27/2018 (the “Resolution”) published yesterday, in the Official Gazette contains guidelines for companies to adapt their Compliance Programs as established in Sections 22 and 23 of the Law on Corporate Criminal Liability No. 27.401 (“Law 27,401”). The Resolution provides procedures very…

Since 2 March 2018, corporate criminal liability law (Law 27,401) is in force. Legal entities will be subject to sanctions in these offenses against the Public Administration and/or corruption: (i) national and transnational bribery and influence peddling; (ii) improper and unlawful transactions of public officials; (iii) illegal exaction committed by a public official; (iv) illicit enrichment of public officials and employees; and (v) forgery of balance sheets and reports to conceal a corruption offense.