In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 19 – While the UN bribery case of US v. Patrick Ho, including allegations of violations of Iran sanctions and Libya and South Sudan arms embargos as well as transfer of funds through Mashreqbank and HSBC comes to trial later this month, on November 19 this sanctions violation settlement: "Geoffrey S. Berman, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, James D. Robnett, the Special Agent in Charge of the New York Field Office of the Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation (“IRS-CI”), and Mark Bialek, Inspector General, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“IG-FRB/CFPB”), announced criminal charges against Société Générale S.A. (“SG” or the “Bank”) consisting of a one-count felony information charging SG with conspiring to violate the Trading with the Enemy Act (“TWEA”) and the Cuban Asset Control Regulations promulgated thereunder (the “Cuban Regulations”) for SG’s role in processing billions of dollars of U.S. dollar transactions using the U.S. financial system, in connection with credit facilities involving Cuba (the “Cuban Credit Facilities”).  The case is assigned to United States District Judge P. Kevin Castel.
Mr. Berman also announced an agreement (the “Agreement”) under which SG agreed to accept responsibility for its conduct by stipulating to the accuracy of an extensive Statement of Facts, pay penalties totaling $1,340,165,000 to federal and state prosecutors and regulators, refrain from all future criminal conduct, and implement remedial measures as required by its regulators.  Assuming SG’s continued compliance with the Agreement, the Government has agreed to defer prosecution for a period of three years, after which time the Government will seek to dismiss the charges.  The $1.34 billion in penalties represents the second largest penalty ever imposed on a financial institution for violations of U.S. economic sanctions." Yet. Four months after the arrest for UN bribery of former Senegalese foreign minister Cheik Gadio and Patrick Ho, the head of China Energy Fund Committee full funded by CEFC China Energy, his ultimate boss at CEFC Ye Jianming was brought in for questioning in China. Among the hooks for the prosecution was payments of alleged bribes not only through HSBC but also Mashreqbank based in Dubai. On October 10 Mashreqbank was hit with and settled money laundering charges by the New York State Financial Services Department: "Although the Branch's customer base consists principally of foreign financial
institutions located in high-risk regions, examiners determined that due diligence files
nonetheless lacked robust information about its foreign correspondent customers' markets." We'll have more on this. On October 4 Ho was again denied bail. Periscope video here. Now on October 9 the prosecution has requested that the trial begin later than the scheduled November 5, writing to Judge Loretta A. Preska among other things that "this past Friday, October 5, 2018, the defendant submitted a classified notice pursuant to Section 5 of the Classified Information Procedures Act (“CIPA”). The defendant could have filed such notice a number of weeks ago, but waited until the very last day on which such a filing would be deemed timely under CIPA. The defendant also did not notify the Government that he intended to submit such a notice until the Court directed the parties to confer during last
week’s conference. The Government now has to draft, have approved for submission, and submit
a classified response in opposition, in which it intends to request a hearing concerning the use, relevance, and admissibility of classified information that would otherwise be made public by the defense during the trial, and expects, assuming appropriate authorization is provided, to request that the hearing be held in camera." Back on October 4 Ho's lawyers argued that dropping the case against Gadio - who will testify against Ho - means that Ho conspired with no one. But Gadio will say he didn't know Ho had $2 million in cash for Chad President Deby in gift boxes; he's being allowed (or made) to say that Deby didn't know either. But this ham handed bribe was converted into a bogus philanthropic gift -- consciousness of guilt, as it were. The trial date of November 5 may not be set in stone, as the defense is planning a filing under Section 5 of the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) to use classified information. Ho has a $2.1 million account in UBS, but Judge Preska said this wasn't the main factor in denying bail. The sleight of hand on Gadio has no impact on the "Uganda scheme" with Sam Kutesa, with whom UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has dealings. Guterres still hasn't started an audit of CEFC - which was openly named in the court hearing on October 4 - in the UN. We'll have more on this. This week in court filings the prosecution make it clear how corrupt the UN is, and why it has banned Inner City Press which reports on it: Ho bribed not one but two Presidents of the General Assembly, and brokered weapons not only to Chad but also Qatar, whose Al Jazeera got the exclusive of Guterres' selection as SG and after getting spoonfed by Guterres' spokesman Stephane Dujarric on June 19 collaborated to get Inner City Press roughed up and banned since by Guterres' corrupt UN. And STILL  Guterres, whose son does UNdisclosed business in Angola, Namibia, Sao Tomo and Cabo Verde, has not even started an audit, only roughed up the Press and banned it now for 93 days. From this week's filing: "Evidence of Transactions with Iran The evidence of the defendant’s interest in and willingness to broker transactions in or with Iran principally consists of emails, spanning a multiple-year period. To choose a few examples: In October 2014, the defendant sent his assistant an email stating, “I am going to BJ [i.e., Beijing] this Friday to see [the Chairman of CEFC NGO and CEFC China] on Sat afternoon. The documents I want to send him before hand in separate items are: . . . 7. Iranian connection (brief).”4 On the same date, the defendant sent his assistant another email, attaching a document, which stated, in pertinent part: 7) Iranian Connection . . . Iran has money in a Bank in china which s under sanction. Iran wishes to purchase precious metal with this money. The precious metal is available through a Bank in HK which cannot accept money from the Bank in China which holds the money but is under sanction. The Iranian agent is looking for a Chinese company acting as a middle man in such transactions and will pay commission. (details to be presented orally) The Iranian connection has strong urge to establish trading relationship with us in oil and products . . . . The following year, in June 2015, the defendant received an email that stated, in pertinent part: “The Iranian team will arrive in BJ . . . . See the attached.” The attachment referenced in the email was a PowerPoint presentation entitled “Presentation to Potential Partners Iran Petroleum Investments.” The next day, the defendant forwarded the email to his assistant, stating, “For writing report to [the Chairman of CEFC NGO and CEFC China].”
The following year, in June 2016, the defendant emailed another individual, blindcopying
his assistant, and stated, in pertinent part, “Will get [two executives of CEFC China] to
meet with [oil executive at company with operations in Iran] in BJ, and [another individual] also on another occasion if he comes. You can start organizing these. . . . Other matters ftf [i.e., face to face].” And also "an email exchange in which Gadio asked the defendant: “Do you think CEFC can intervene with the Chinese state to get an urgent, extremely confidential and significant military weapon assistance to our friend [the President of Chad] who has engaged in the battle of his life against the devils of Bokko Haram?,” to which the defendant replied, “Your important message has been forwarded. It is being given the highest level of consideration. Will inform you once I hear back.”
The defendant also sought to and did broker arms transactions unrelated to the Chad and
Uganda schemes charged in this case. For example: In March 2015, an individual sent the defendant an email, stating, “I have the list and end user agreement. Pls advise next step.” On the same day, the defendant replied, in pertinent part, “Find a way to pass them onto me and we can execute that right away[].” The individual replied, “Attached. [W]e have the funding and processing mechanisms in place. If it works nice there will be much more. Also for S. Sudan.” The attachment to this email was a document entitled “End User Certificate,” certifying that the user of the goods in question would be the Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Libya. The goods listed on the document included numerous arms. The following month, the defendant sent an email that stated in pertinent part: “It so turns out Qatar also needs urgently a list of toys from us. But for the same reason we had for Libya, we cannot sell directly to them. Is there a way you could act as an intermediary in both cases?” The person whom the defendant emailed replied: “Qatar good chance bc there is no embargo. Libya is another case bc going against an embargo is tricky.” The defendant responded: “Qatar needs new toys quite urgently. Their chief is coming to China and we hope to give them a piece of good news. Please confirm soonest.” This is outrageous, that an NGO still accredited under Guterres was selling weapons into South South, Libya and Qatar. Resign. And, on multiple PGAs: "among the individuals whom the defendant [Patrick Ho] is charged with bribing is Sam Kutesa, the Ugandan Foreign Minister. The Government expects that the evidence will show that the corrupt relationship between the defendant and Kutesa developed between in or about September 2014 and September 2015, when Kutesa was serving as the PGA (specifically, the PGA for the 69th session of the UN General Assembly). The evidence, in both the form of emails and a recorded phone call, also shows that, just
as he did with respect to Kutesa when he was the PGA, the defendant sought to cultivate a
business relationship with Kutesa’s predecessor, John Ashe, who served as the PGA between in
or about September 2013 and September 2014. As he did with Kutesa, the defendant began by introducing himself to Ashe as the Secretary-General of CEFC NGO. And just as he did with
Kutesa when he served as the PGA, the defendant invited Ashe to visit CEFC NGO in Hong Kong and to speak at various events.
In mid-April 2014, Ashe traveled to Hong Kong and met with the defendant and others.
After the trip, Ashe’s aide sent a letter to the defendant thanking the Chairman of CEFC NGO (who was also the Chairman of CEFC China) for the contribution of $50,000 to support the PGA. The aide had solicited the contribution from the defendant prior to the Hong Kong trip, and the defendant had confirmed that CEFC NGO would make the contribution.
In or about early June 2014, the defendant requested that Ashe officiate over a forum that
CEFC NGO was planning to hold at the UN, and also attend and officiate over a luncheon at the UN the following day. (The defendant made virtually the same request of Kutesa once he
became the PGA.) The day before the forum (July 6, 2014), the defendant emailed two business associates of Ashe, who assisted him in raising funds, to invite them to the forum and luncheon and to request their assistance in “urg[ing] the PGA to grace the occasion with his presence and to deliver a short remark.”
On or about the same day, the defendant and one of these associates (“Associate-1”)
spoke by phone. (See Ex. A (draft transcript).) During the call, which was recorded, the
defendant confirmed that he wanted Ashe to attend his event. The following conversation then took place:
Associate-1: So the last question, so sorry if I ask too direct. . . . [H]ave you, made some
contribution to him . . . ?
The defendant: Yeah, we already paid.
Associate-1: Oh you did? OkayThe defendant: Well, not a whole lot but it’s—it’s okay. On a couple of occasions. But I
think the major contribution will come in after we talk about what he can—what he can
help us with.
Associate-1: What you—what you mean major contribution? It’s after he return uh—
leave the job?
The defendant: Yes, yes.
. . .
Associate-1: Wonderful . . . okay.
The defendant: That’s not a—that’s not a problem. The problem is—uh, it’s give and
take.
Associate-1: Give and take. That’s—of course. This is the—this is business, right?
The defendant: Yeah, right.
 2 These two business associates subsequently pleaded guilty to bribing Ashe, based on
conduct unrelated to the defendant and CEFC. Ashe was charged with tax offenses arising from
his allegedly failing to disclose bribe payments as income. He passed away before trial, and the
charges against him were therefore dismissed." We'll have more on this. On July 19, the lawyers for Patrick Ho, led by Benjamin Rosenberg of Dechert LLP, argued before U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska that count after count of the indicts should be dismissed. Edward Kim of Krieger Kim & Lewin LLP tried to get Ho's emails and text messages suppressed, without success. On August 9, Ho's appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to get out on bail was again denied. Now the prosecution, opposing yet another Ho bail application, has written: "Gadio has been meeting with the Government for some time and he is expected to testify at trial pursuant to a recently executed non-prosecution agreement.  And far from weakening the case, Gadio’s testimony will provide substantial evidence of the defendant’s guilt. As the defendant is well-aware from a written disclosure made by the Government more than four months ago, Gadio is expected to testify, in sum and among other things, that (i) the defendant provided $2 million in cash, concealed within a gift box, to the President of Chad in connection with a business meeting in Chad in or about December 2014, (ii) the President refused to accept this obvious bribe, which Gadio understood was connected to the defendant’s interest in business opportunities in Chad, and (iii) the defendant thereafter drafted a letter to the President, purporting to pledge this $2 million to charitable causes, but the defendant appeared to have no interest in doing charitable works in Chad, and indeed, the defendant never asked Gadio about the status of the purported “donation” or made any other reference to the subject. (See Def. Ltr. Ex. A.) This expected testimony considerably strengthens the Government’s proof beyond the
already-strong case reflected in the detailed Complaint. The Complaint explained that, following a December 2014 business meeting in Chad, the defendant drafted a letter pledging a $2 million so-called “donation” to “the people of Chad at [the President of Chad’s] personal disposal to support [his] social and other programs as [he] see[s] fit.” (Compl. ¶ 28(a).) The Complaint did not, however, explain whether—and at what point—any money was actually paid. Gadio’s expected testimony makes clear that, in fact, the defendant provided $2 million in cash directly to the President, concealed within a gift box, and that the pledge letter was drafted after the bribe had already been offered. Thus, the evidence of the defendant’s intent to bribe the President of Chad is, on the whole, much more robust in light of Gadio’s expected testimony." On September 24, a letter from May was disclosed: UN accredited executive of an NGO still in ECOSOC handed Deby of Chad $2 million in a box, for oil. This is the UN, which won't even audit this scandal. Guterres is corruption - and on September 26 even banned Inner City Press which reports on this from a human rights event. We'll have more on this. On September 15, the day after Ho's co-defendant Cheik Gadio had the case against him dropped by Prosecutor Douglas Zolkind, who ask worked to convict Ng Lap Seng using testimony of apparently still free Francis Lorenzo. Sean Hecker, a lawyer for Mr. Gadio said that “Dr. Gadio looks forward to continuing to cooperate with U.S. authorities." But when Agence France Presse reported it, as picked up in the media in Nigeria, it was "Gadio Is Cleared."

***

Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2018 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for