SDNY
Judge Berman Sets Halkbank
Contempt Hearing on Feb 10 After
Noting 2d Circuit Logic on
Fugitives
By Matthew
Russell Lee,
Patreon, Thread
Video
Honduras
- The
Source - The
Root - etc
SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Dec 9 – Turkey's Halkbank was
indicted for Iran sanctions
violations and money
laundering on October 15 in
the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New
York. On October 21, Turkey
named convicted former
Halkbank executive Hakan
Atilla as the new managing
director of Borsa Istanbul.
On
December 9 SDNY Judge Richard
M. Berman issued an order
threatening to hold Halkbank
in contempt and setting out a
timeline: "ORDER as to as to
Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. IT
IS HEREBY ORDERED that a
hearing will be held in this
matter on February 10, 2020,
at 10:00 a.m. at which
Halkbank shall show cause why
it should not be held in
contempt of the First Summons
and the Second Summons and
contempt sanctions imposed; IT
IS FURTHER ORDERED that,
should counsel of record enter
an appearance on behalf of
Halkbank prior to the date of
the hearing, Halkbank shall be
arraigned on the Indictment
forthwith, i.e. as soon as
practicable following such
appearance; IT IS FURTHER
ORDERED that the Government
shall submit briefing
regarding a contempt finding
and contempt sanctions on or
before noon on January 3,
2020; Halkbank, if appearing
through counsel of record,
shall submit briefing
regarding a contempt finding
and contempt sanctions on or
before noon on January 21,
2020; and the Government may
submit a reply on or before
5:00 p.m. on January 23, 2020;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the
direct testimony of any
witness(es) to be called at
the hearing shall be submitted
by affidavit (10 pages, double
spaced) 10 days prior to the
hearing. Cross examination and
re-direct shall be live; IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED that the
Government will serve this
Order on Halkbank forthwith
following the issuance of this
Order by any means specified
in the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure, including
the same way the first or
second summons was served; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that,
the Government will serve this
Order, the Second Summons, and
the Indictment on Halkbank
forthwith following of the
issuance of this Order, by any
means specified under Federal
Rule of Criminal Procedure 4.
(Brief due by 1/3/2020.,
Responses due by 1/21/2020,
Reply to Response to Brief due
by 1/23/2020., Contempt
Hearing set for 2/10/2020 at
10:00 AM before Judge Richard
M. Berman.) (Signed by Judge
Richard M. Berman on
12/9/2019)."
On December 5
Judge Berman issued a more
detailed order denying the
application by King &
Spalding to make a "special
appearance" in this criminal
case. Judge Berman last month
in his courtroom asked if
there is any Second Circuit
Court of Appeals precedent. On
December 5 he wrote and ruled:
"The Second
Circuit recognizes that a
defendant may become a
fugitive when, “having learned
of charges while legally
outside the jurisdiction, [the
defendant] ‘constructively
flees’ by deciding not to
return.” See United States v.
Catino, 735 F.2d 718, 722 (2d
Cir. 1984); see also United
States v. Blanco, 861 F.2d
773, 779 (2d Cir. 1988) (“A
person can be said to be a
fugitive when, while abroad,
they learn that they are under
indictment and make no effort
to return to the United States
to face charges.”). It appears
to the Court that this is what
Halkbank – which is an
important institution in
Turkey – has done so far in
this case. “The primary
purpose of the fugitive
disentitlement
doctrine—promoting mutuality
of litigation—is served both
when a defendant flees the
United States and when he
chooses to remain outside the
United States.” Miller, 166 F.
Supp. 3d at 348; see also
Martirossian, 917 F.3d at 890
(where the Court confirmed
that “a defendant need not be
Case 1:15-cr-00867-RMB
Document 581 Filed 12/05/19
Page 26 of 27 27
present in and leave a
jurisdiction to become a
fugitive; the mere refusal to
report for prosecution can
constitute constructive
flight”). Halkbank has failed
to appear following the
service of two summonses, with
full knowledge and notice of
the charges in the Indictment
and of the related Atilla and
Zarrab cases. See pp. 3–5
above. Halkbank has also been
represented by U.S. legal
counsel, Mr. Hruska of King
& Spaulding LLP, for at
least two years in connection
with the U.S. criminal
investigation of Halkbank’s
alleged Iran sanctions
evasion. See Gov. Letter,
dated Nov. 4, 2019, at 1.
And, this Court
has found that “Halkbank has
willfully and knowingly
disobeyed the Court’s order in
the First Summons to appear at
the First Conference.” Order,
dated Oct. 23, 2019, at 3. The
fugitive disentitlement
doctrine exists to encourage
compliance with the law and to
protect against entities that
“‘attempt to invoke from a
safe distance only so much of
a United States court’s
jurisdiction as might secure .
. . a dismissal while
carefully shielding [itself]
from the possibility of a
penal sanction.’” Hayes, 118
F. Supp. 3d at 625–26
(brackets omitted) (quoting
Collazos v. United States, 368
F.3d 190, 200 (2d Cir. 2004));
see also Niemi v. Lasshofer,
728 F.3d 1252, 1255 (10th Cir.
2013).
IV. Conclusion
& Order For the reasons
stated above, the Court denies
Halkbank’s application, dated
November 19, 2019, to make a
special appearance."
Back on November 26 the US
Attorney office opposed
the special appearance, noting
"Halkbank participates in a
U.S. Department of Agriculture
program that provides
guaranteed financing for
certain buyers of U.S.
agricultural exports. In
order to shield its access to
these essential U.S. financial
markets and facilities,
Halkbank went to extraordinary
lengths to conceal the scheme
from Treasury officials.
Because of Halkbank’s
relationships with the Central
Bank of Iran, NIOC, and other
Iranian government and private
entities, sanctions against
the Government of Iran had
particular significance for
Halkbank and Treasury believed
Halkbank was at particular
risk of Iranian
sanctions-evasion efforts.
Accordingly, Treasury
officials maintained
continuous and in-depth
communications with Halkbank’s
top executives. These included
in-person meetings held in
Treasury’s Washington, D.C.
offices and Halkbank’s Turkey
offices; telephone calls
between Halkbank executives in
Turkey and Treasury officials
in the United States; and
letter and email
correspondence." We'll have
more on this.
King &
Spalding's Andrew
C. Hruska
wanted to file by ECF without
making a notice of appearance.
Judge Berman said he believes
a notice of appearance is
required, and would not give
legal advise on what should be
written on it. King and
Spalding said they will file
on paper, presumably meaning
their briefing.
Of this
lawless attempt to escape the
court's reach, Inner City
Press asked the UN which has
made worse arguments for
impunity for bringing cholera
to Haiti for its comment
(Turkish state media were
present in the SDNY on
November 5). There has been no
answer from the UN.
Back on
October 22, when SDNY Judge
Berman held a status
conference, Halkbank did not
show up. (Inner City Press has
asked follow scofflaw UN
Sec-Gen Antonio Guterres about
this, in writing). Late - at
10 pm - on November 4 the US
filed with Judge Berman to
"respond to a letter delivered
to the Court today by King
& Spalding LLP, U.S.
counsel for Halkbank,
requesting permission to enter
a limited and special
appearance; and will also
outline the Court’s civil
contempt authority to compel
compliance with its orders,
specifically the summonses
directing Halkbank’s
appearance in court to respond
to the charges against it in
the superseding indictment, S6
15 Cr. 867 (RMB) (the
“Indictment”). For the reasons
discussed more fully below,
Halkbank has been properly
served with the Indictment and
two summonses to appear
pursuant to Rule 4 of the
Federal Rules of Criminal
Procedure. King &
Spalding’s request to enter a
special appearance should be
denied, and that request does
not excuse Halkbank’s
obligation to comply with the
validly served
summonses.... the Court
has the authority to impose
civil contempt sanctions
against Halkbank for its
knowing violations of the
First Summons and—in the event
the bank fails to appear for
the November 5, 2019
arraignment in response to the
Second Summons—the Second
Summons on notice to the bank
and with an opportunity to be
heard, based on clear and
convincing evidence of the
bank’s noncompliance and its
lack of reasonable diligence
in attempting to comply. A per
diem fine for each day of
Halkbank’s continued
noncompliance (i.e., its
failure to appear in this
action through counsel to
answer the charges in the
Indictment) may be imposed
based on the character and
magnitude of the harm
threatened by the bank’s
continued contempt, the
probable effectiveness of the
fine, and the financial
consequences to Halkbank in
light of the defendant’s
financial resources and other
relevant circumstances. Should
Halkbank fail to appear on
November 5, the Government
respectfully submits that the
defendant should be ordered to
show cause why contempt
sanctions should not be
imposed and a potential
hearing date scheduled." Watch
this site.
On October 23 Judge Berman has
ordered: "WHEREAS the Court
finds that Halkbank has
willfully and knowingly
disobeyed the Court's order in
the First Smmnons to appear at
the First Conference, IT IS
HEREBY ORDERED that, to afford
Halkbank an opportunity to
cure its noncompliance with
the First Summons, the Court
is issuing a second summons
(the "Second Summons") with
this Order, directing Halkbank
to appear for an arraignment
in this matter on November 5,
2019 at 11:00 a.m, (the
"Second Conference"); IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED that, the
Government will serve this
Order, the Second Summons, and
the Indictment on Halkbank as
soon as practicable after the
issuance of this Order, by
means specified under Federal
Rule of Criminal Procedure 4,
including without limitation
the following: 1. Delivery by
mail, parcel service, or other
common carrier to Halkbank's
principal published business
address; 2. Electronic
transmission to King &
Spalding; 3. Delivery to any
registered agent of Halkbank
in the United States. IT IS
FURTHER ORDERED that the
Government's execution of any
of these forms of service will
constitute (additional)
effective service of a summons
and this Order. Should
Halkbank fail for a second
time to appear pursuant to the
Second Summons, the Court will
consider any appropriate
sanctions for knowing and
willful noncompliance. SO
ORDERED: (Signed by Judge
Richard M. Berman on
10/23/2019)."
Halkbank's
longtime law firm King &
Spalding put in a letter by
Andrew C. Hruska that it is
not accepting service of
process for Halkbank, which
has essentially done rogue,
like the United Nations did
when it dodged legal papers
for killing 10,000 in Haiti by
bringing cholera. This is what
the international "system" has
become. But Inner City Press
will have more, much more, on
this. For now, here
is K&S scofflaw letter.
The UN under Antonio Guterres
is entirely dodging the
controversy, eager as Guterres
is to get a second term by not
offending either the US or any
other power, especially China
but also including Turkey.
Meanwhile Guterres' partner
the UN Censorship Alliance
(UNCA) has half of its content
consisting of defense of
Atilla and Erdogan, whether on
assaults on the Kurds or
violations of sanctions.
***
Feedback: Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com
Box
20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY
NY 10017
Other, earlier Inner
City Press are listed here,
and some are available in the ProQuest
service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.
Copyright 2006-2019 Inner
City Press, Inc. To request reprint or
other permission, e-contact Editorial
[at] innercitypress.com for
|