Doing deals with terrorists has a price: US$778m. The US Department of Justice (DOJ) revealed this week that it had fined Lafarge for its conduct in Syria between 2013 and 2014. In addition Lafarge and its subsidiary Lafarge Cement Syria (LCS) have pleaded guilty to one count of conspiring to provide material support to designated foreign terrorist organisations in Syria. It is uncertain how exactly the fine will be paid but it is worth noting that successor company Holcim reported net sales of nearly US$27bn in 2021. The fine represents nearly 2% of this.
A reasonable amount of new detail can be found on the DOJ website. LCS was essentially dealing with the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and the al-Nusrah Front (ANF) as they would a local government in relation to the running of the Jalabiyeh cement plant. As a reminder, both of these groups were defined as terrorist organisations by the US government at the time. The relationship apparently started as monthly payments to local armed groups, including ISIS and ANF, to allow movement through checkpoints. This later progressed to a de-facto tax based on cement sales. However, it became worse when LCS started asking ISIS to block or tax imports of cement from Turkey-based competitors into northern Syria as part of a revenue-sharing agreement. Effectively LCS was fixing the price of cement in a war zone by collaborating with terrorists. In the end LCS, the intermediaries and the terrorist groups made around US$80m whilst they were working together.
Holcim’s interpretation of the ruling was keen to point out that the conduct in Syria was recognised by the DOJ as not involving Holcim in any way. The DOJ did agree that Lafarge’s executives didn't disclose their activities in Syria to its successor company Holcim either before or after the merger in 2015. However, it pointed out that Holcim had not carried out due diligence of LCS’s operations in Syria. It added that, “Lafarge, LCS and the successor company also did not self-report the conduct or fully cooperate in the investigation.”
Despite this, other information that Holcim also highlighted was that the US authorities were now happy that effective compliance and risk management controls were in place to prevent anything similar happening again. Crucially, it said that the DOJ didn’t think that an independent compliance monitor was required. It pointed out that none of the conduct involved Lafarge’s operations or employees in the US and that none of the Lafarge executives were working for Holcim or any associated company. Finally, the group wanted to report that the DOJ found that none of the former Lafarge executives involved shared any of the “methods, goals or ideologies” of the terrorist groups operating in area at the time.
The immediate reaction from all of this is what happens to the ongoing legal case in France, also about Lafarge’s conduct in Syria? In mid-May 2022 the Court of Appeals confirmed a charge of complicity in crimes against humanity against Lafarge. The company then reportedly started the appeal process at the Supreme Court. Other charges, including financing terrorism, endangering life and violating an embargo, were lodged earlier in the legal process. The US is generally seen as being the leading prosecutor of international corporate crime but if the French legal system also issued a fine to Lafarge on the same scale things could become difficult for Holcim. The other complication for the French legal case is that the national intelligence services allegedly used Lafarge’s links with the Syrian terror groups to acquire information but they did not warn the company that it was committing a crime.
Holcim is a different company from what it was when LafargeHolcim formed in 2015. It is being run by a new chief executive officer who came in from another company well after the merger and is diversifying away from the trio of cement, concrete and aggregates with the addition of a fourth business area of light building materials. Alongside this the group has been selling off businesses in the developing world and focusing on Europe and North America. Yet it is still being defined by the criminal actions of a company it absorbed seven years ago and the behaviour of staff long gone. Those actions have been investigated and punishment delivered. More may be coming.
