The Panama Prosecution

Potential Issues

The last few weeks have proved beyond the shadow of doubt that the Panama Papers are still the hottest topic blazing across global media - perhaps with the exception of the Unaoil Scandal, which may not have begun with as loud a bang, but is rapidly gaining notoriety (doubters need only take a look at the tragic state of Citigroup's once-highly-sought-after shares).

The media is in the business of selling the latest information. Information should either be entertaining or educational in nature, or it won't sell. Nobody cares how much some prince is squirrelling away for when his children begin to consider his presence in the palace a damper on their (partying) spirits. To put it bluntly, if it isn't about what kind of company a celebrity generally likes to rent for the evening, it had better concern hard evidence of high-class financial fraud in order to keep the subscribers happy & engaged.

The Panama Papers are interesting in the eyes of the general public as long as they are not just a list of people who thought that Panama is a nice place to invest & that Mossack Fonseca is the right law firm for the job. From the legal perspective, they may or may not be helpful in fighting the menace of money-laundering, tax evasion, etc. depending on whether they are legally admissible evidence. From the media perspective, if the picture they paint is sensational enough, it will translate into millions in revenues for the media sector.

But the 2 perspectives are intertwined: The Panama Papers won't be worth the paper they're printed on (pun intended) if they are inadmissible as evidence. Which means that the task of the relevant tax authorities in each country is roughly along the following lines:

Step 1: Determine whether the information is either a record of Mossack Fonseca business or falls under the attorney client privilege.

Step 2: Recommend prosecution of any national or international officials who committed any crime & consequently tainted the decisions they took in the fulfilment of their duties.

Step 3: Investigate any private individuals who either committed a financial crime or caused injury to an innocent third party by doing business with Mossack Fonseca.

Granted that it is difficult to conduct an analysis of evidence that is incomplete - according to the International Consortium Of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), the full collection will be released globally in May - but several national governments across the world have announced that they are going to try anyway. The final classification of the Panama Papers will decide whether it will continue to be front page news in respectable journals or become tabloid fodder, during the next few months. For the time being, all the general public can do is acquaint itself with the definition of the terms "business record", "attorney client privilege", "tainted" & "injury".

Business Records

Business records are the accurate documentation of all activities conducted by the business & include meeting minutes, memoranda, employment contracts, & accounting source documents. They have specific retention periods (based on both legal requirements & internal company policies) during which they must be kept accessible to both company management & government regulatory agencies. Considering that business records are legally admissible evidence, the retention period must also take into account the possibility of the company being sued.

Attorney Client Privilege

The attorney client privilege is the commitment to keep all communications between an attorney & the client private from all third parties including business associates, competitors, government agencies & law enforcement. This privilege applies to all but the following situations:

1: The client hasn't officially retained the services of the attorney, in writing.

2: The shared information can be obtained from a non-privileged source.

3: The client waives the privilege.

4: The client seeks advice on how to conceal or commit a crime.

5: The client is deceased.

Taint

To taint anything is to damage or destroy the validity of said item or procedure. In effect, lack of credibility is not legally considered as limited to the crimes that the convict has been proven to be guilty of. It affects his/her credibility in everything he/she says or does in the past, present or future. This is particularly important where the convict is either a national or international official, or pursues a profession that is based on being completely honest & reliable with his/her clients (such as a banker or a lawyer).

Injury

Injury includes (but is not limited to):

1: Physical hurt.

2: Damage to reputation or dignity.

3: Loss of a legal right.

4: Reduction in the value of legal assets.

5: Breach of contract.

Whether the perpetrator(s) committed the injury wilfully or out of negligence, he/she/they is/are liable for payment of damages for the harm caused to the interests of the victim(s).