When hiding a bribe promise in India became a US crime — and now isn't

 

By Rajiv Shah 

One and a half years ago, I wrote a blog wondering whether merely hiding the promise of a bribe in India — not actually paying it — is a crime in the US. Citing a CNN report on the Adani case in the US, I quoted it to say that the US justice department had sought to indict Gautam Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani and others for "promising" more than $250 million in bribes to Indian government officials to secure solar energy contracts.

Promised, that too in India? And not given? I wondered. How could that be a crime in America, unless they tried to do it in the US? The CNN story quoted Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lisa Miller as saying that those bribes were meant "to lie to investors and banks to raise billions of dollars, and to obstruct justice."

It added, "Adani personally met with an Indian government official to advance the scheme, which took place between 2020 and 2024. The defendants frequently met and discussed the bribery scheme, including evidence on several phones."

The story continues, quoting Miller, "Some of that documentation included a cell phone to extensively track specific details on the bribes, a photograph of a document summarizing various bribe amounts and PowerPoint and Excel analyses that summarized various options for paying and concealing bribe payments."

But what was Adani's crime, that too in the US, I didn't understand. Miller had the following explanation: "Adani and his associates tried to hide these bribery schemes from US investors in order to obtain financing, including to fund those solar energy supply contracts procured through bribery."

So hiding a bribery promise made in India, in order to raise funds in the US, was found to be a crime in the scheme of things!

I am citing this blog because now, a New York Times (NYT) story dated July 15 quotes a US justice department official admitting that the case against the Adanis doesn't stand, since the alleged bribery did not take place in the US. The story reminds readers that US federal prosecutors had earlier argued that Adani was subject to US law because his company solicited money from American investors.

However, in a complete U-turn, the Trump administration, says the NYT story, has now taken a totally opposite stance. It quotes a letter from Trent McCotter, a top Justice Department official, describing the indictment as a "foreign case" that was "outside his agency's purview."

Amidst reports that Adani's offer to invest $10 billion in America was the reason behind the Trump administration dropping the Adani case, the NYT story quotes McCotter as stating that he had decided to dismiss the case "before Adani's $10 billion investment was discussed."

It's quite another thing that, the NYT story says, Adani acknowledged he had offered to invest $10 billion in the United States "as part of the resolution of his criminal case," while denying it "ultimately played no role in the Justice Department's decision to abandon its prosecution against him"!