Yesterday's post on the extradition of the "NatWest 3" to the US prompted this angry reply from "Stuart" in the UK:
As with almost all US commentators, you miss the point. The alleged loss was suffered by NatWest, a British Bank, who were advised to sell shares allegedly below value. This took place in London. The British authorities have decided not to prosecute on this matter. The US authorities have no business doing so. This is extra territorial reach at its worst. If it was Enron itself, a US corporation, that had lost out from this, I would have no objection to a US prosecution. However, there appears to be no suggestion that Enron itself lost out in this deal, and there seems to be no connection here with the financial wrongdoings within Enron itself.
The furore about the extradition is a sideshow, the principle at stake is the seeming ability of the US to prosecute UK citizens under their laws, alleged crimes taking place in the UK which the alleged victim is a UK institution. Our message to you is - butt out of our affairs.
Today I looked a little more deeply into the charges against the NatWest 3. Here's how The Scotsman describes what the men stand accused of:
They face allegations that in 2000 they advised their former employer NatWest to sell part of a company owned by the collapsed US giant Enron for less than it was worth. They then left the bank and bought a stake in the company, which they sold on at a significantly higher price to make a huge profit, it is claimed.
And were that all there was to it, I guess I'd have to agree with Stewart that this is purely a domestic, i.e. soley UK, affair. But then there's this paragraph that follows immediately the one above:
It is alleged that they travelled to Houston in 2000 to meet Enron's chief financial officer, Andrew Fastow, to concoct the scheme. They each face a maximum of 35 years in prison if convicted of all the charges against them.
Well now things are a bit clearer. If they did indeed fly to Houston and conspired with Andrew Fastow -a man who has since been convicted and is now serving time for his part in the Enron collapse - then there is good reason for these men to at least be under suspicion of wrongdoing. We already know Fastow defrauded Enron stockholders and helped to bankrupt the company. That doesn't mean that the NatWest 3 are guilty of anything, per se, but I have to believe that it is not safe to come to America and plan with American executives how to scam companies or individual in other countries. Still, the fact that the UK has not prosecuted does make you wonder if this is, as Stewart suggests, a case of "extra-terroritial reach."
Thus, I decided to read the actual indictment as it appears on the Department of Justice website. So did the BBC. It's summary provides details not mentioned by The Scotsman.
Continue reading "Extraordinary Extradition II: Where's the Beef?" »
