The SFO is the principal enforcer of the Bribery Act 2010, which has been designed to encourage good corporate governance and enhance the reputation of the City of London and the UK as a safe place to do business.
This independent committee, under the chairmanship of Lord Roskill, considered how changes to the law and criminal proceedings could lead to more effective ways of fighting fraud.
[10] The decision was made following concerns about national security[11][12] amidst reports that the Saudi Government would stop sharing counterterrorist information with the UK if the investigation continued.
This outcome followed a settlement by BAE, as part of a global agreement reached in 2010 with the Serious Fraud Office and the US Department of Justice, concerning contracts in a number of countries.
The terms of the settlement include an agreement by BAE to pay an ex-gratia sum (£30 million less any fine imposed by the Crown Court) for the benefit of the people of Tanzania.
[21] In June 2017, John Varley, Roger Jenkins, Tom Kalaris and Richard Boath were charged with offences regarding Barclays's raising of £11.8 billion in emergency funds.
That money US$23 million was transferred as a result of complex transactions by a company controlled by a Ukrainian businessman Serhiy Kurchenko, a subject of the European Union restrictive measures.
[26] When the Ukrainian prosecutor general's office failed to provide documents needed for the investigation, a British court in January 2015 dropped the case and ordered the assets be unfrozen.
[35] The SFO has cited the KF Concept case as an example of one of its successful ponzi scheme prosecutions, where a banker was jailed for 10 years for running an unauthorized investment business and defrauding investors of amounts over £17 million.
This funding aims to improve the agency's resources and operational efficiency, particularly in light of concerns regarding its effectiveness in handling high-profile cases that have resulted in failed prosecutions.
There are ongoing discussions about the need for more substantial long-term support to ensure that the SFO can adequately fulfill its mandate and tackle the rising threats posed by financial crime and corruption in the UK.
[39] An example of a successful SFO prosecution for fraudulent trading is the InterGB group, the collective name for a number of companies that, between 1996 and 2000, extracted more than £85 million from three financial institutions by submitting false invoices.
This recovery was part of an ongoing proceeds of crime investigation that has yielded nearly £6 million to date, including the sale of Rastogi's Marylebone home and seizure of valuable assets.
This investment aims to strengthen the agency's capacity to recover criminal assets, expand its use of technology for disclosure purposes, and improve its case management system.
These recent activities and developments demonstrate the SFO's continued efforts to adapt and strengthen its capabilities in the fight against serious fraud and financial crime.
[56] The SFO, which reports to the Attorney General's Office, has over time repeatedly faced attempts by politicians to roll it into a broader crime-fighting body.
[68] In July 2020, His Honour Judge Beddoe had rebuked SFO director Lisa Osofsky over "flattering" texts from a US-based private investigator[69] who was seeking to secure more favourable sentences for his clients.
"[79] Judge said the SFO took the view that issues identified had "undermined the process of disclosure in this case to the extent that the trial cannot safely and fairly proceed".
[87] It also examined what lessons have been learnt from recent high-profile cases, as well as addressing concerns over evidence disclosure, staff culture and victim support (in March and October 2022).
[105] The review was criticizing the conduct of SFO head: "It is clear that Osofsky was faced with a difficult situation very early in her tenure and made a number of mistakes and misjudgments which, with the benefit of hindsight, she now accepts.
[120][121] Emily Thornberry MP, Labour's Shadow Attorney General, stated on the report that it "lays bare a catalogue of woeful mismanagement and inexplicable misjudgements at the top of the SFO".
[122] She stated further "It is vital that the Attorney General not only commits to implement Sir David's recommendations in full, but asks herself whether the senior managers at the SFO whose failures are exposed in this report are really the individuals best placed to repair the damage.
[128][129][130] The Serious Fraud Office has not referred any lawyers to the Solicitors Regulation Authority over the collapse of a high-profile criminal trial, MPs heard in February 2022.
[131][132][126] The SFO must prevent third parties having "direct access" to the watchdog's director and ensure all prosecutions have an "effective disclosure strategy", Calvert-Smith's review into the calamitous Unaoil bribery case recommended – as a third man jailed after the investigation had his name cleared.
[134] According to the Spotlight on corruption, Serco and Unaoil "botched disclosures raise concerns about whether there are more systemic problems in the SFO’s strategy and conduct of high-stakes cases.
Susan Hawley, executive director at anti-corruption charity Spotlight on Corruption, said: "Both the Calvert-Smith and the Altman reviews point to similar and very serious underlying issues behind the SFO’s spate of collapsed trials.
"[144] The UK's Serious Fraud Office spent £16.2 million on its corruption investigation into the oil consultancy Unaoil, with nearly a third allocated to external legal fees.
In November 2021, in her letter: "SFO’s revolving door works better than a closed shop" published by the Financial Times[147] Osofsky said that they "advocate for the interchange of personnel.
In March 2023, Private Eye magazine, a UK-based widely recognized news and current affairs publication edited by Ian Hislop, revealed that SFO chief Lisa Osofsky has been forced to disclose further information about her recusal from three separate investigations.
Media highlighted the clear conflict of interest in Osofsky's decision to reject disclosure under the FOI request, and commented that the whole affair remains "unexplained and unsatisfactory".