Volkswagen software needs to explain its actions to avoid … – Investing.com Spain

By David Ingram and Joel Schectman

NEW YORK / WASHINGTON (Reuters) – It is likely that Volkswagen (XETRA have to demonstrate that it had legitimate reasons to install software that allowed falsifying emissions tests their vehicles if you want to avoid the action of the US criminal justice, said a team of lawyers.

The German manufacturer admitted that used air cleaning regulators in some of its diesel models that had installed a “device deactivation “designed to manipulate the measurements on emissions.

Therefore, the company could face large civil fines by the US government, legal experts said on environmental processes, although not involved in the Volkswagen case .

The criminal investigation, confirmed on Tuesday by a source familiar with the matter, seeks not only to detect possible violations of US law “Clean Air Act”, but also expand the laws against fraud, false statements to regulators and other crimes, the lawyers explained.

Employees also be exposed to be investigated individually and duty to face criminal charges if found to have committed a crime, experts added.

The spokesman for the US Justice Department declined to comment on the matter. Meanwhile, a representative of Volkswagen did not respond to questions about what the legal strategy to be followed by the German firm.

The deliberate falsification of results on toxic emissions could be seen by the US Justice as a multiple fraud against consumers, regulators and distributors, lawyers explained.

However, it is expected that there is a debate between the Justice Department and the legal team of Volkswagen to clarify the reasons why which the company and its employees decided to install this software. Generally, the US court must find facts that demonstrate an obvious attempt to commit a crime – such as emails or incriminating information from cooperating witnesses. – Before they can change the facts

The installation of the devices not necessarily evidence intentional misconduct, said Bruce Pasfield, an environmental former prosecutor American country.

Carmakers sometimes install these devices to allow vehicles to be tested under different standards that are required by foreign regulators said Pasfield, currently working for the firm Alston & amp; Bird. “You can not will conclude that there has been intentionally criminal,” he said.

Research at Volkswagen could be one of the first cases in which the Justice Department decides to apply the new guidelines to toughen judgments on such matters and increase the number of prosecutions of business executives.

David Uhlman, former head of the environmental crimes section of the Justice Department, said that criminal charges will be virtually inevitable if the allegations against Volkswagen are true, but added that the company can still find a line of defense.

“If the software was installed for another purpose, Volkswagen could not exculpate any civil action, but could do so in criminal matters, “explained Uhlman, now a professor of law at the University of Michigan.

It is not yet clear whether Volkswagen will invoke such a defense. Nor can you deduct yet who will represent it. The law firm Kirkland & amp; Ellis, who received a copy of the letter sent to the Environmental Protection Agency of the US automaker, declined to comment.

Volkswagen is the third largest vehicle manufacturer faces a criminal investigation United States in recent years. In 2014, Toyota Motor (TOKYO agreed to pay 1,200 million dollars in fines for hiding problem that made their vehicles suddenly accelerate.

General Motors (NYSE had to pay $ 900 million to conceal both the regulators and the general public, a defect in the power of some of its engines.

Both General Motors and Toyota signed an agreement known as “suspension agreement proceedings “which puts on bail and allows them to meet later with the penalties imposed.

It will predictably difficult for Volkswagen to negotiate a similar treatment, depending on the office that is in charge of the investigation as Uhlman. Historically, the section of environmental crime has urged companies to both plead guilty and to defend himself in court, he said.

The prosecution has been favorable to undertake criminal proceedings against company executives individually , experts said lawyers. This month, the US attorney general, Sally Quillian Yates, announced that the new doctrine of Justice indicted companies will no longer receive favorable treatment to help during the process of investigation to uncover malpractice unless responsible for it are declared .

Under the new doctrine “will be difficult to see that the defendants have failed to carefully examine how individual sentences will face if they are found guilty,” said David Buente, former prosecutor for environmental crimes that currently works for the law firm Sidley Austin.

“One of the key questions for lawyers will know how echelon of the company has reached this matter,” concluded Buente.