Canada's Defence Trade Controls for Academic
Institutions
Canada’s Controlled Goods Program and the US ITAR
John W. Boscariol
June 22, 2015
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
1
Canada’s Trade Controls
¬ export and technology transfer controls
¬ Export Control List
¬ Area Control List
¬ economic sanctions
¬
¬
¬
¬
Special Economic Measures Act
United Nations Act
Criminal Code
Freezing Assets of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act
¬ domestic industrial security
¬ Defence Production Act, Controlled Goods Program
¬ other trade control legislation
¬ blocking orders (Cuba)
¬ anti-boycott policy and discriminatory business practices laws
¬ anti-bribery law (Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act and FCPA)
¬ compliance convergence
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
2
Today’s Focus
¬ background on Canada’s Controlled Goods Program
and relationship with United States defense trade
controls
¬ interaction with Canada’s export control regime
¬ overview of US ITAR
¬ continuing challenges
¬ May 2, 2015 proposed amendments to Controlled
Goods Regulations
¬ five best practices
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
3
Canada’s Controlled Goods Program
¬ domestic industrial security program
¬ Defence Production Act and its Controlled Goods
Regulations
¬ administered by the Controlled Goods Directorate
(CGD) (part of Public Works and Government
Services Canada)
¬ background and history
¬ relationship with U.S. ITAR and “Canadian exemption”
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
4
Integration of Canadian and US Defence
Trade Controls
¬ examples
¬ ITAR 126.5(b) “Canadian exemption” – permanent and temporary
exports of certain defence articles and technical data to “Canadianregistered persons” defined by reference to Canada’s Defence
Production Act
¬ Canada’s ECL item 5504(i) controls export of US-origin goods or
technology “which have been determined under Parts 120 to 130 of
Title 22 of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations of the Code
of Federal Regulations (United States) as having substantial military
applicability…”
¬ Canada’s Export Permit Regulations paragraph 3(2)(c) requires that
a US ITAR authorization be obtained for the export from Canada of
defence-controlled US-origin goods, goods incorporating defencecontrolled US-origin goods, and goods manufactured in Canada
using defence-controlled US-origin goods
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
5
What Is a Controlled Good?
¬ defined in the Schedule to the Defence
Production Act as:
¬ any US-origin good or technology that is a “defense
article” as defined under the ITAR or a non-US
origin good that is manufactured using “technical
data” of United States origin, as defined under the
ITAR if the “technical data” is a “defense article”,
and
¬ goods and technology, regardless of origin, that are
specifically listed in the Schedule (and refer to
Groups 2, 5 and 6 of the Export Control List with
amendments)
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
6
So We Have Controlled Goods, What Now?
¬ as a CGP registrant, you must:
¬ perform a “security risk management
assessment”
¬ develop and implement a written security plan
¬ appoint a Designated Official
¬ maintain records and supporting documentation
¬ provide training programs and security briefings
¬ advise CGD of any security breaches
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
7
So We Have Controlled Goods, What Now?
¬ Designated Official (DO) must
¬ submit to a security assessment by CGD
¬ conduct, with consent, security assessments of individuals
requiring access to controlled goods or technology
¬ determine extent to which individual poses risk of violation
¬ make and keep individual evaluations of honesty, reliability
and trustworthiness
¬ authorize extent to which individuals may examine, possess,
transfer controlled goods or technology
¬ submit applications to CGD for temporary workers / visitors to
access controlled goods or technology
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
8
Who Can Access Controlled Goods at Your
Facility?
¬ access to your controlled goods and technology
will be limited to:
¬ officers, directors and employees authorized by DO
¬ temporary workers or visitors (not Canadian citizens or
residents) proposed by DO and authorized by CGD
¬ contractual workers that are themselves registered or
employees of registered firm
¬ officers, directors and employees of US companies
registered under ITAR
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
9
Student Access to Controlled Goods
¬ a student who is a Canadian citizen or permanent
resident is to be treated as an employee and an
international student as a temporary worker,
regardless of whether or not those students are paid
¬ students under supervision of an individual employed
at a registered business, and have a requirement to
examine, possess or transfer controlled goods located
at that registered business, must be security assessed
by its DO (e.g., co-ops, on-site thesis research study
or similar arrangements)
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
10
Student Access to Controlled Goods
¬ students under supervision of an individual employed
at a registered educational institution and have
requirement to examine, possess or transfer controlled
goods located at a registered educational institution,
must be security assessed by the DO of that
educational institution
¬ for joint projects requiring examination, possession or
transfer of controlled goods located at both a
registered business and a registered educational
institution, the student can be security assessed by
either the DO from the educational institution or the
DO from the business
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
11
Student Access to Controlled Goods
¬ International students are exempt from registration (like
temporary workers)
¬ DO submits application for exemption to CGD and CGD
conducts security assessment
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
12
Enforcement and Penalties
¬ non-compliance attracts penalties of up to $2 million per day and 10
years imprisonment
¬ possible enforcement action
¬ Voluntary Disposal
¬ Negotiated Compliance
¬ Warning Letter
¬ Formal Hearing
¬ Suspension or Cancellation of Registration
¬ Detention and Removal
¬ Prosecution
¬
no prosecutions yet
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
13
Interaction Between CGP and Export
Controls
¬ domestic security regime (PWGSC - CGD) vs
controls over international transfers (DFATD ECD)
¬ exporting CGP items
¬ must apply to ECD for export permit and
provide evidence of registration under CGP
¬ exporting most CGP items from Canada for
end-use in the United States does not require a
permit
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
14
Interaction Between CGP and Export
Controls
¬ discovery of potential contraventions
¬ mandatory security breach report to CGD
“without delay”
¬ voluntary disclosure available for ECD but
informal
¬ others to notify
¬ CBSA, RCMP, DFATD Economic Law Section (sanctions),
Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission
¬ US authorities
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
15
United States International Traffic in
Arms Regulations
¬ importance of retaining US counsel
¬ ITAR applies where:
¬ activity involves a “defense article” – controlled under
US Munitions List; and
¬ it is a regulated activity (e.g., export, re-export, release
to foreign national)
¬ manufactures, exporters. brokers must register with
US Department of State Directorate of Defense Trade
Controls (DDTC)
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
16
United States International Traffic in
Arms Regulations
¬ “defense article”
¬ any item on USML
¬ any item specially designed, configured, modified or adapted
for military use
¬ applies to
¬ US-origin defense articles
¬ non-US-origin items that contain US-origin defense articles
¬ non-US origin produced using US-origin ITAR data or defense
services
¬ applies extraterritorially and “forever”
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
17
United States International Traffic in
Arms Regulations
¬ authorization required for
¬ exports from US
¬ re-exports, re-transfers (e.g., change in enduse, end-user) of articles and defense services
¬ furnishing defense services
¬ temporary imports of defense articles into US
¬ brokering of defense articles
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
18
United States International Traffic in
Arms Regulations
¬ types of authorizations
¬ licenses (DSP) – exports, re-exports,
retransfers, technical data transfers
¬ agreements (ongoing)
¬ technical assistance agreements
¬ manufacturing licensing agreements
¬ distribution agreements
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
19
United States International Traffic in
Arms Regulations
¬ ITAR exemptions - include
¬ basic marketing information
¬ public domain
¬ general scientific, mathematical and
engineering principles commonly taught in
schools, colleges, universities
¬ Canadian exemption (including CGPregistered)
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
20
United States International Traffic in
Arms Regulations
¬ license denial policy
¬ 25 or so “proscribed countries”
¬ including China, Cuba, Vietnam, Venezuela,
and other sanctioned and embargoed countries
¬ includes in-country transfers to foreign
nationals of proscribed countries
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
21
United States International Traffic in
Arms Regulations
¬ enforcement
¬ civil and criminal penalties
¬ debarment
¬ order compliance measures and ongoing audit
¬ aggressive
¬ ITT - $100 million and debarement
¬ Qioptic - $25 million
¬ Northrop Grumman - $15 million
¬ BAE (UK) - $400 million
¬ see enforcement reports on DDTC website
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
22
United States International Traffic in
Arms Regulations
¬
DDTC compliance program
¬ Organization Structure
¬ Corporate Commitment and Policy
¬ Identification, Receipt and Tracking of ITAR Controlled Items/Technical Data
¬ Re-Exports/Retransfers
¬ Restricted/Prohibited Exports and Transfers
¬ Recordkeeping
¬ Internal Monitoring
¬ Training
¬ Violations and Penalties
¬
www.pmddtc.state.gov/compliance/documents/compliance_programs.pdf.
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
23
Integration of Canadian and US Defence
Trade Controls
¬ key differences between Canada’s CGP and the US
ITAR
¬ ITAR is an export control regime
¬ ITAR applies to deemed exports and deemed re-exports
¬ ITAR focuses on 25 proscribed countries
¬ ITAR does not require registration or security screening
for examination, possession or transfer of controlled
goods within the United States
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
24
Canadian Human Rights vs. ITAR
¬ the problem
¬ in order to benefit from ITAR 126.5 “Canadian exemption”, transfers
of technical data and defence services must be to Canadian
registered persons
¬ exemption unavailable if “dual national” of a proscribed country,
including those holding citizenship or born there
¬ compliance with US ITAR licensing requirements
¬ terms of Technical Assistance Agreement (TAA) or
Manufacturing Licensing Agreement (MLA) approved by US
State Dept may allow transfers only to certain “dual nationals”
¬ to comply, Canadian companies required to determine citizenship,
country of origin/birth, exclude access to certain areas, projects
¬ may also require application for license or TAA/MLA
amendments
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
25
Canadian Human Rights vs. ITAR
¬ prima facie breach of Canadian human rights law, if on basis of
citizenship or country of origin:
¬ terminate an employee
¬ deny employment
¬ restrict access to training
¬ treat others preferentially
¬ promotions
¬ overtime
¬ scheduling
¬ also - asking about citizenship, nationality, country of birth
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
26
Canadian Human Rights vs. ITAR
¬ examples of conflicts (ITAR)
¬ General Motors Defense (2007 – Ontario Human Rights
Commission)
¬ complaints by six employees, Canadian citizens or landed
immigrants, citizenships of third countries (ITAR
proscribed states)
¬ employees sent home with pay, restricted their access to
information, reassignments
¬ settled, including monetary remedies
¬ employer to make “all reasonable efforts to secure such
lawful permission as may be obtained to minimize any
differential treatment”
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
27
Canadian Human Rights vs. ITAR
¬ examples of conflicts (ITAR) (cont’d)
¬ Bell Helicopter (2008 – Quebec Human Rights
Commission)
¬ complainant born in Haiti, Canadian citizen for
30 years
¬ applied for and hired on internship and training
¬ subsequently denied internship because of ITAR
rules
¬ claim for damages settled
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
28
Canadian Human Rights vs. ITAR
¬ Québec Human Rights Commission
¬ “reiterates its opposition to the application of the ITAR rules in
Québec because of their discriminatory impact”
¬ “they include requirements that are inconsistent with the Québec
Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms”
¬ “can no longer accept that companies established in Québec
submit to foreign rules that infringe on the values and rights of
citizens as recognized by the National Assembly”
¬ “following the political developments in this matter attentively …
any person that believes that his or her rights have been
infringed by the application of the ITAR rules may rely on the
services of the Commission”
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
29
The “New” ITAR Rule (ITAR 126.18)
¬ May 16, 2011 final rule – became effective August 15, 2011
¬ no approval from the US State Department Directorate of Defense
Trade Controls required for the transfer of defence articles, including
technical data, to a foreign business entity, foreign government
entity, or international organization that is an approved end-user or
consignee for those items,
¬ “including the transfer to dual nationals or third-country nationals
who are bona fide, regular employees, directly employed by the
foreign business entity”
¬ transfer must take place completely within the territories where the
end-user is located or where the consignee operates, and must be
within the scope of an approved export license, other export
authorization, or license exemption
¬ the recipient of the defence article is required to have in place
“effective procedures to prevent diversion” to destinations, entities, or
for purposes other than those authorized by the applicable export
licence or other authorization
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
30
New ITAR Rule (ITAR 126.18)
¬ “effective procedures to prevent diversion” – non-US firms that are
consignees or end-users of the defence articles must either:
¬ require a security clearance approved by a foreign government
for its employees or
¬ implement a screening process for their employees and execute
Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDA) that provide assurances that
employees will not transfer any information to persons or entities
unless specifically authorized by the employer
¬ must screen all employees who are to access controlled items
for "substantive contacts" with the 25 restricted or prohibited
countries under ITAR — including China, Vietnam, Haiti, Cuba,
Venezuela and other countries subject to U.S. military sanctions
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
31
New ITAR Rule (ITAR 126.18)
¬ what are “substantive contacts”?
¬ include:
¬ regular travel to those countries
¬ recent or continuing contact with agents, brokers and
nationals of those countries
¬ continued demonstrated allegiance to those countries
¬ maintenance of business relationships with persons from
those countries
¬ maintenance of a residence in those countries
¬ receiving salary or other continuing monetary compensation
from those countries
¬ acts otherwise indicating a risk of diversion
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
32
New ITAR Rule (ITAR 126.18)
¬ if an employee is determined to have “substantive
contacts” with persons from the ITAR-restricted or
prohibited countries, this is presumed to raise a risk of
diversion "unless DDTC determines otherwise“
¬ other requirements
¬ technology security/clearance plan that includes
procedures for screening employees’ substantive contacts
¬ maintaining records of same for five years
¬ technology security/clearance plan and screening records
to be made available to DDTC or its agents for civil or
criminal law enforcement upon request
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
33
How Does Canada’s Controlled Goods
Program Work With ITAR 126.18?
¬ problem: the final ITAR rule does not contain an
explicit exemption for companies that are registered
under and comply with CGP
¬ CGD Enhanced Security Strategy (October 1, 2011)
¬ August 2011 Exchange of Letters Between US DDTC
and PWGSC
¬ DDTC has “high regard for the CGP as a means to
mitigate the risks of diversion”
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
34
How Does Canada’s Controlled Goods
Program Work With ITAR 126.18?
¬ what has DDTC policy section said (May
2012)?
¬ gives CGP the “golden seal of approval”
¬ no circumstances in which CGP screening will
be insufficient for 126.18 substantive contact
screening
¬ non-disclosure agreement is not required if
CGP-screened – but has since retracted
¬ endeavouring to put it in writing
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
35
How Does Canada’s Controlled Goods
Program Work With ITAR 126.18?
¬ employee concerns and pushback
¬ on sensitive and personal information regarding:
¬ travel frequency, duration and location
¬ “significant and meaningful” associations
¬ criminal history
¬ financial issues
¬ previous broad Privacy Act statement: consent to disclosure
“to law enforcement and other government departments and
agencies, including foreign governments, which conduct
checks and/or investigations in accordance with Memoranda
of Understanding (MOUs) established with Public Works and
Government Services Canada (PWGSC)”
¬ no longer references foreign governments
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
36
How Does Canada’s Controlled Goods
Program Work With ITAR 126.18?
¬ continuing ITAR/CGP challenges
¬ no guarantee yet that screening in accordance with
ESS, CGP and Canadian law will meet the ITAR
section 126.18 requirements
¬ are US exporters/partners comfortable relying on
section 126.18?
¬ does this resolve human rights and privacy issues?
¬ practical issues remain
¬ highly sensitive area for employees
¬ continue education and explanation
¬ careful adherence to the CGP application and guidance
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
37
How Does Canada’s Controlled Goods
Program Work With ITAR 126.18?
¬ continuing ITAR/CGP challenges
¬ DDTC’s suggested non-disclosure agreement (NDA)
requires employees to comply with ITAR and certify that they
have never acted for or provided information to 126.1
countries, including Cuba, etc.
¬ October 2014 - “made in Canada” NDA screening form to
be signed by the security-assessed employee in Canada
(http://ssi-iss.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/dmc-cgd/ft-fo/aaee-nsaaeng.html)
¬ CGD states that “for those CGP registrants accessing
U.S. International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR)
goods, this acknowledgement may be used to meet the
requirements of ITAR 126.18(c)(2)”
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
38
How Does Canada’s Controlled Goods
Program Work With ITAR 126.18?
¬ continuing ITAR/CGP challenges
¬ does not resolve anything for academic institutions
¬ broader issues:
¬ is this consistent with Canadian constitutional
(Charter) law?
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
39
May 16, 2014 Changes to Coverage of
CGP – Defence Production Act Schedule
¬ seeks to resolve issues regarding differences in coverage of
ITAR and CGP by creating two streams of controlled goods
¬ Stream 1 – goods of United States origin that are “defense
articles” under ITAR and goods manufactured using ITARcontrolled “technical data” of United States origin
¬ addresses US export control reform
¬ what does “United States origin” mean?
¬ overzealous ITAR destination control statements?
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
40
May 16, 2014 Changes to Coverage of
CGP – Defence Production Act Schedule
¬ concerns with Stream 2 – certain Group 2, 5504, and
Group 6 items of US and other origin
¬ administrative burden of tracking two streams vs
one
¬ consistent with original purpose of CGP?
¬ competitiveness vis-à-vis United States and other
countries?
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
41
May 2, 2015 - Proposed Amendments to
Controlled Goods Regulations
¬ reflect and clarify current CGP practices implemented
in Phase I of the Enhanced Security Strategy
¬ includes definition of international student
¬ address the three ESS Phase II activities that require
regulatory authority in order to be implemented
¬ enable the Minister to provide recommendation to DO for
high-risk employees
¬ obtain consent of individual in visitor exemption process
¬ require registrants to submit list of all individuals who have
undergone security assessment
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
42
May 2, 2015 - Proposed Amendments to
Controlled Goods Regulations
¬ concerns of Standing Joint Committee for the Scrutiny of
Regulations
¬ clarifying criteria for revocation and suspension of registrations and
exemptions
¬ clarifying decisional criteria for reinstatement of a suspended
registration or exemption
¬ specifying a time period where the Regulations currently state
“without delay”
¬ change in information – 5 days
¬ security breach – 3 days
¬ change in criminal history – 5 days
¬ change in exemption application (intl students) – 5 days
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
43
Best Practice #1 – Screening for
Designated Persons
¬ lists of designated persons – individuals, companies,
organizations
¬ Special Economic Measures Act regulations
¬ United Nations Act regulations
¬ Freezing Assets of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act
regulations
¬ Criminal Code anti-terrorism provisions
¬ any involvement in the activity – research partner,
collaborator, purchaser, ultimate user, vendor,
creditor, broker, service provider
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
44
Best Practice #2 – Contract Clauses and
Certifications
¬ trade control clauses for agreements with vendors,
customers, research partners, etc.
¬ designated person
¬ compliance with trade controls and certifications
¬ product information, including ECL/ECCN
classification
¬ end-use certification
¬ indemnification
¬ notification of investigations or inquiries, cooperation
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
45
Best Practice #3 – Using Voluntary
Disclosure Mechanisms
¬ in certain circumstances, can be an effective tool
¬ coordinate with several government depts
¬ Export Controls Division
¬ Economic Law Division
¬ CBSA
¬ RCMP
¬ PWGSC Controlled Goods Directorate (mandatory
reporting)
¬ other (e.g., Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission)
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
46
Best Practice #4 – Controlling Technology
Transfers
¬ higher risk vs export shipments
¬ process governing
¬ email
¬ virtual meetings – tele/video conference
¬ plans/drawings – marking
¬ server access – upload/download
¬ cloud computing
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
47
Best Practice #5 – “Home Grown”
Compliance Policies
¬ trade control compliance in the shadow of the United
States
¬ Canadian controls can be more onerous than US
controls – e.g., encryption, Russia, Belarus, Burma,
North Korea
¬ Canadian controls over US-origin goods and
technology
¬ conflicts
¬ Cuba
¬ ITAR
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
48
Compliance Policy and Internal
Controls
¬ export controls, economic sanctions, defence trade controls
¬ core elements should include:
¬ corporate compliance manual
¬ screens and lists
¬ appointment of compliance officers
¬ internal audit procedures
¬ correction / voluntary disclosure process
¬ training programs
¬ contract review
¬ conflict procedures
John W. Boscariol, International Trade and Investment Law Group, McCarthy Tétrault LLP / mccarthy.ca
John W. Boscariol
McCarthy Tétrault LLP
International Trade and Investment Law
www.mccarthy.ca
Direct Line: 416-601-7835
E-mail: jboscariol@mccarthy.ca
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/johnboscarioltradelaw
Twitter: www.twitter.com/tradelawyer