I. Recent Cases

‍

On July 28, 2026, the DOJ issued, for the first time, a declination of a health care company under its new Corporate Enforcement Policy (the “CEP”), in favor of the Campus Eye Management entities. The entities voluntarily self-disclosed the misconduct before any government investigation, fully cooperated with the authorities, and timely remediated the conduct, including by strengthening their policies and corporate criminal compliance program. As part of the resolution, they agreed to pay USD $1,000,000 in disgorgement. In parallel, the DOJ indicted DiDonato, the individual allegedly responsible.

‍

This first case demonstrates that the CEP works in practice: it rewards companies that identify, disclose, and remediate misconduct through compliance programs while allowing the DOJ to prosecute the responsible individuals that committed a corporate crime.

‍

II. The DOJ Corporate Enforcement Policy

‍

On March 10, 2026, the DOJ released the first-ever Department-wide Corporate Enforcement Policy for criminal matters, promoting uniformity, predictability, and fairness in how it pursues white-collar cases.

‍

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche stated: “This Department of Justice is committed to transparency and fairness, and our first-ever Department-wide corporate enforcement policy is yet another example of that. This policy creates incentives for companies to come forward and do the right thing when misconduct occurs [...]. Well-intentioned businesses know that, across the Department, they will be rewarded when they self-disclose wrongdoing, cooperate with our investigations, and remediate the misconduct.”

‍

III. Implications for Mexico

‍

Article 421 of the Código Nacional de Procedimientos Penales provides that effective compliance programs may serve as mitigating factors in determining the criminal liability of legal entities. Additionally, Article 11 BIS, last paragraph, of the Código Penal Federal establishes that legal entities may be exempt from criminal liability or receive reduced penalties when they demonstrate they had an effective compliance program that was circumvented by the individual wrongdoer.

‍

The first cases demonstrating the procedural effectiveness of criminal compliance programs have already occurred in Mexico. The decision to decline prosecution in favor of companies has resulted from the timely implementation of a preventive crime compliance strategy in environmental and drug related felonies.

‍

Conclusion: Implementing a corporate criminal compliance program offers significant advantages both in the United States and in Mexico. Corporations with transnational operations should consider these regulatory frameworks as a strategic investment in protecting their assets and reputation.

‍

For any questions or comments, you can contact our expert team.