Project Name
Country
Prohibited Practice(s)
Nationality
Year
Type
Duration
The Sanctions Committee (the “Committee”) found that the preponderance of evidence indicated that the Respondent, who was chief officer, representative and shareholder of a company, had participated in corrupt practices in order to secure regulatory approvals critical to the execution of a project financed by IDB Invest (the “Project”). Such practices, consisted of (i) facilitating the laundering and repatriation of bribes from a third-party to a then high-ranking public official, and (ii) making improper contributions to the political campaign of that public official.
The Statement of Charges and Evidence (the "Statement of Charges") prepared by the Office of Institutional Integrity ("OII") contained OII’s charge that the Respondent, in his position as chief officer, representative and shareholder of a company, had participated in corrupt practices sanctionable under the IDB Group Sanctions Procedures. OII alleged that the Respondent had facilitated the laundering and repatriation of bribes from a third party to a then high-ranking public official in Ecuador and had made contributions to the political campaign of that public official to secure regulatory approvals critical to the execution of the Project.
Consequently, and in accordance with the Sanctions Procedures, the Sanctions Officer issued a Notice of Administrative Action (the “Notice”) to the Respondent. In its Response to the Notice, the Respondent contested all charges brought by OII. Following the issuance of the Notice and reviewing the Respondent’s response, the Sanctions Officer issued a Determination finding that it was more likely than not that the Respondent had participated in corrupt practices. The Sanctions Officer provided also for the extension of sanctions to a company controlled by the Respondent, based on Section 8.3 of the Sanctions Procedures.
The Sanctions Officer imposed an eight-year debarment against the Respondent, making him ineligible to participate in projects financed by the IDB Group, including institutional procurements and third-party funded activities. The Respondent appealed the Sanction Officer’s Determination to the Sanctions Committee, contesting the charges and the level and extension of the sanctions imposed.
Following a review of the record (including the Statement of Charges, the Notice, the Respondent’s Response, the Sanctions Officer’s Determination, the Respondent’s Appeal and the OII’s Reply), the Committee concluded that it was more likely than not that the Respondent, acting as representative and chief officer of a company, had participated in a corrupt practice. The Committee also concluded that the Respondent either knew or should have known of another corrupt practice, which the Respondent failed to prevent, despite being in a position to do so. The Committee imposed on the Respondent the sanction of debarment with conditional release for a period of one hundred thirty-two (132) months. During that period, the Respondent will be ineligible to participate in or be awarded contracts for projects or activities financed by the IDB Group. In determining the sanction, the Committee considered as aggravating factors the use of sophisticated means, the Respondent’s central role in the prohibited practices, the management’s role in the prohibited practices, the involvement of public officials, and the interference with the investigation. The Committee concluded that there were no mitigating factors.
Starting January 1, 2029, the IDB Group may commute the debarment sanction, provided that the conditions established by the Sanctions Committee are met.
This sanction is subject to cross-debarment by the Multilateral Development Banks signatories to the Agreement for Mutual Enforcement of Debarment Decisions.