Defending several executives without the risk of counsel being removed

In cases against companies, investigators almost always work with several people at once: the CEO, the CFO, the chief accountant, department heads. The company’s first instinct is to have “its own” lawyer defend everyone. That is understandable: the lawyer knows the business, is trusted and is easier to coordinate. But it is precisely this arrangement that most often breaks down at the most critical moment.

Why one lawyer for everyone is a risk

The Russian Code of Criminal Procedure prohibits one defence counsel from defending two suspects or accused persons if the interests of one conflict with those of the other (Art. 49(6)). Counsel also may not take part in a case if they provide or have provided legal assistance to a person whose interests conflict with those of the client (Art. 72(1)(3)).

At the start of a case the executives’ interests usually coincide. But positions diverge quickly: one is ready to testify, another believes they acted on instructions, a third points to someone else’s signature. At that moment the investigator raises a conflict of interest and the lawyer is removed. As a rule, this happens when the defence is needed most: before a decision on pre-trial restraint or at a key interview.

The consequences of removal:

• new counsel joins the case without knowing the file or its history;
• positions agreed with the previous lawyer have to be revisited;
• the client loses time looking for a lawyer they do not have;
• statements given in a hurry remain in the file.

How our solution works

We distribute the defence in advance among lawyers from different bar associations. The client signs a separate agreement with each of them. Formally they are independent defence counsel, so no conflict of interest arises between them.

At the same time they work as one team:

• single coordination by Horizon Global — one defence strategy for the whole company wherever interests coincide;
• a shared communication channel — the materials and history of the case are available to all counsel in a closed environment;
• cover without a learning curve — if a lawyer is busy in another hearing, a colleague who does not need to study the case from scratch takes over urgent actions;
• one line of reporting to the company, its shareholders or head office.

If the executives’ positions genuinely diverge, each of them is already protected by their own lawyer, and the company does not lose control of the case.

When to do this

Ideally — before the first investigative action, as part of preparing for inspections. In practice we often set up this arrangement after a search, once it becomes clear which executives are at risk. The earlier defence counsel are assigned, the less chance investigators have of using diverging positions as a means of pressure.

For banks and financial institutions this arrangement is part of the “Criminal defence for banks” solution, together with the “Drill” programme and the panic button.