AFP Guidance On Self-Reporting And Cooperation In Foreign Bribery And Other Investigations

Australian authorities have sought to provide a clearer pathway for corporations to resolve foreign bribery and other investigations. In the absence of a mechanism for deferred prosecution agreements in Australia, new guidance from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) provides insight into how corporations can expect to interact with investigators and what will be expected to seek to bring investigations to conclusion.

The AFP’s new guidance on Optimal Investigation Outcomes for Self-Reporting and Cooperating Corporations builds on prior AFP guidance on Corporate Cooperation and self-reporting, and outlines a potential pathway for the negotiated civil resolution of investigations involving corporations that self-report misconduct and provide genuine cooperation. It is primarily directed towards allegations of foreign bribery and related offending, however, the principles may be applied in other AFP investigations.

The guidance provides that where a corporation has engaged in alleged criminal misconduct, but has:

• genuinely cooperated in an investigation; and
• demonstrated that prosecution of the corporation would not be in the public interest,

the AFP will likely determine that the optimal investigation outcome is a non-conviction based (civil) Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) (POCA) resolution (eg. pecuniary penalties or forfeiture orders), unless exceptional circumstances apply. This outcome is anticipated to be negotiated on a “without prejudice” basis with a corporation, with a view to agreeing terms of resolution, to be reflected in proposed consent orders and a deed of settlement. The resolution will only be finalised once a Court has made any final orders and the Court retains discretion as to whether to approve and make any such proposed consent orders.   

Best practice cooperation 

In assessing the quality of the cooperation, the AFP will have regard to a lengthy list of factors including but not limited to: 

• the quality and timeliness of self-reporting and disclosure, including approach to privilege claims and material such as internal investigation reports;
• the involvement of directors, employees, agents and associates in an investigation; and
• any cooperation with foreign or domestic parallel investigations or proceedings.

Public interest factors 

In making its assessment, the AFP will have regard to various public interest factors including the culture of integrity within the corporation, which may be demonstrated through: 

• risk assessments, mitigation procedures and due diligence;
• detection methods and whistleblower policies;
• communication and training; and
• monitoring, review and adequate resourcing of compliance programs.

Non-conviction based POCA resolution

Further details are also provided on the process once the AFP determines that a non-conviction based POCA resolution is the appropriate investigation outcome, including the AFP’s expectations regarding “without prejudice” negotiations. Such negotiations would include dealing with potential disgorgement of benefits from the alleged offending, among other things, as well as payment of costs associated with the investigation, negotiations and any court processes and any payment to a relevant prevention organisation or civil society entity.  

The guidance is published by Taskforce Solaris, the AFP’s dedicated multi-disciplinary team established in late 2025 to support the enforcement of Australia’s foreign bribery laws. 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.