Danger Money

Sky news reports this morning that the UK Government paid bribes to Libyan officials to get British citizens evacuated from the chaos of the civil uprising.

The Bribery Act 2010 doesn't officially come into force until April of this year, but one of the main provisions makes it a criminal offence to bribe a public official to obtain an advantage in the conduct of business.  Granted, the government evacuating its citizens from danger is not 'the conduct of business', but what if it was a company evacuating their employees?  They were only in Libya to conduct business, so surely this would be caught by the Act?  And what about other situations where an employee finds themselves in danger while overseas on assignment and the only way out is to offer a bribe?  Are they then to face prosecution?

Of course, another legal requirement on employers is to protect the health, safety and welfare of their employees. Which of these legal imperatives is to take precendent?  Currently the only defence in the case of a breach of the Bribery Act is to evidence that 'adequate procedures' are in place to prevent Bribery taking place, but I expect that once cases start coming through the courts we may find a defence of extenuating circumstances creeping in when the courts realise that the zero tolerance approach of the Bribery Act is perhaps unachievably idealistic.


http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Libya-Britons-Evacuation-From-Tripoli-Continues-Amid-Descriptions-Of-Violent-Hell-In-Libya/Article/201102415940550?lpos=Home_Top_Stories_Header_2&lid=ARTICLE_15940550_Libya%3A_Britons_Evacuation_From_Tripoli_Continues_Amid_Descriptions_Of_Violent_Hell_In_Libya