SNC66

The Statement of Charges and Evidence (the "Statement of Charges") prepared by the Office of Institutional Integrity ("OII") contained OII’s charge that a Principal Respondent had participated in corrupt practices sanctionable under the IDB Group Sanctions Procedures. OII alleged that the Principal 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. 

The OII also submitted evidence indicating that the Respondent Affiliate was controlled by the Principal Respondent. The OII argued that this connection provided a basis for the extension of sanctions to the Respondent Affiliate under Section 8.3 of the Sanctions Procedures.

Consequently, and in accordance with the Sanctions Procedures, the Sanctions Officer issued a Notice of Administrative Action (the “Notice”) to the Respondent Affiliate. In its Response to the Notice, the Respondent Affiliate contested all charges brought by OII. Following the issuance of the Notice and reviewing the Respondent Affiliate’s response, the Sanctions Officer issued a Determination finding that it was more likely than not that the Principal Respondent had participated in corrupt practices. The Sanctions Officer provided also for the extension of sanctions to the Respondent Affiliate under Section 8.3 of the Sanctions Procedures. 

The Sanctions Officer imposed an eight-year debarment against the Respondent Affiliate, making it ineligible to participate in projects financed by the IDB Group, including institutional procurements and third-party funded activities. The Respondent Affiliate appealed the Sanction Officer’s Determination to the Sanctions Committee, contesting the charges and the level of the sanctions imposed. 

Following a review of the record (including the Statement of Charges, the Notice, the Respondent Affiliate’s Response, the Sanctions Officer’s Determination, the Respondent Affiliate’s Appeal and the OII’s Reply), the Committee concluded that it was more likely than not that the Principal Respondent, acting as representative and chief officer of a company, had participated in a corrupt practice. The Committee also concluded that the Principal Respondent either knew or should have known of another corrupt practice, which the Principal Respondent failed to prevent, despite being in a position to do so. The Committee imposed on the Principal Respondent the sanction of debarment with conditional release for a period of one hundred thirty-two (132) months. During that period, the Principal Respondent will be ineligible to participate in or be awarded contracts for projects or activities financed by the IDB Group. 

Pursuant to Section 8.3 of the Sanctions Procedures, the Sanctions Committee also extended this sanction to the Respondent Affiliate, finding that the preponderance of evidence indicated that the Respondent Affiliate was controlled by the Principal Respondent.

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.