In 2006, Asadi accepted GE Energy’s offer to serve as its Iraq Country Executive and relocated to Amman, Jordan. Iraqi officials informed Asadi of their concern that GE Energy hired a woman closely associated with a senior Iraqi official to curry favor with that official in negotiating a lucrative joint venture agreement. Concerned this alleged conduct violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, Asadi reported the issue to his supervisor and to the GE Energy ombudsperson for the region. Shortly following these internal reports, Asadi received a “surprisingly negative” performance review. GE Energy pressured him to step down from his role as Iraq Country Executive and accept a reduced role in the region with minimal responsibility. Asadi did not comply and, approximately one year after he made the internal reports, GE Energy fired him.

Ruling:

No. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the trial court’s ruling in favor of GE Energy. The court concluded that the plain meaning of the statute requires that whistle-blowers must have reported the unlawful activity to the SEC in order to be protected under the Dodd-Frank whistle-blower retaliation provision. Since Asadi’s whistle-blowing was confined to GE Energy’s internal management, he was not eligible for Dodd-Frank whistle-blower protection. The SEC’s broader interpretation of whistleblowing as covering reports made to the SEC, another federal agency, or the company’s internal management was not binding on court.

True or False

1. Asadi is not protected as a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Act, because by failing to engage in external whistleblowing he fails to meet the statutory definition of whistleblower.

2. If Asadi qualified as a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Act, he would have been protected by the anti-retaliation and confidentiality provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act.

3. Hiring a women closely associated with the Iraqi official with whom it was negotiating a “lucrative joint venture agreement” does not violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, because it does not involve the payment of money or property to the Iraqi official.

4. If Asadi qualified as a whistleblower under the Dodd-Frank Act, he would been titled to double back pay and a bounty equal to 10 to 30 percent of the penalties imposed on GE Energy for payment of the bribe (up to $2 million) and accounting violations (up to $25 million).

5. Asadi’s wrongful employment discharge claim against GE Energy must be resolved by one of the International Arbitration Forums, such as ICC, LCIA, AAA.

Answer rating: 100% (QA)

1 False The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the trial courts ruling in favor of GE Ene... View the full answer