Coercion is the practice of compelling a person to behave in an involuntary manner (either through action or inaction), by the use of threats, intimidation, or some other form of pressure or force. Extortion occurs when a person either unlawfully obtains money, property, or services from a person, entity, or institution through coercion or intimidation, or threatens a person, entity, or institution with physical or reputational harm unless they pay money, or property (or is profiting in some other manner). Threats, coercion, or extortion of company staff or subcontractors can be detrimental to the safety and welfare of individuals, as well as to the productivity of the business activity as a whole. Critical personnel or entire workforces may not attend work if perceived to be at risk, and employees may feel forced to undermine the company by actively participating in illegal or unethical activities if they or their families are threatened. Isolated threat or coercion events, even when perpetrated by individuals or based on a hoax, can have widespread and dramatic effects on the morale of entire workforces and the success of both micro‐ and macro‐level business activities, even when driven by individual and group perceptions rather than by a clinical assessment of risk. The company should consider the following when facing such threats:
§ Consider the welfare of the employee and overall workforce morale.
§ Consider the implications to corporate reputation and business continuity.
§ Obtain all available details about the incident.
§ If it appears a credible extortion, threat, or coercive event, mobilize the CRT.
§ Identity of perpetrators, their motive, credibility, capability, and likely intentions.
§ Conduct a detailed analysis of the threat: to kill, injure, or kidnap personnel or to sabotage, damage, or steal equipment or intellectual property.
§ Establish the implications if the threat were to be carried out.
§ Establish whether dialogue can be established without increasing the threat.
§ Determine what external government and specialist resources might be required.
§ Gather information on any other existing or previous similar threats and their outcomes.
§ Consider the legal and long‐term business implications of conceding to demands.
§ Review the capability of local law enforcement agencies to act to eliminate the threat; confirm they are not involved.
It is important for companies to make a determination of the nature, extent, and likelihood of a threat or coercive risk, taking into account the welfare and safety of employees, corporate reputation, and the business continuity requirements. Typically, such risk elements are identified by or reported to local managers, and in coordination with the company's security manager, a pragmatic threat assessment should be undertaken, balancing the likelihood of the threat being implemented against the impacts the threat will have on the individual or group, as well as the company operations. While the safety of employees is paramount, companies must also consider the legal liabilities in the event of a threat being carried out. The company must also evaluate whether coerced individuals are assisting (albeit unwillingly) criminal groups to protect family members, are seeking financial compensation for false claims, or are indeed at any real risk.
Threats may be made to specific individuals or as a blanket statement to communities or particular groups. Threats and coercion may also be used as a business vehicle by unscrupulous companies seeking to deter competition. In some countries, criminal threats are often masked under the auspices of insurgency and terrorism. Companies should seek to determine the motive behind threats and coercion. Understanding the nature, likelihood, and scope of any postulated threat can be developed, in part, by establishing the gender, race, age, education level, voice characteristics, and mental or emotional state of the person making the threat, whether in person or by telephone. Any mention of a demand for money or other concessions will also assist in determining the nature and extent of the risk, confirming the motive, credibility, capability, and likely intention of the perpetrator(s).
The company may wish to review security arrangements of employees, consider withdrawal or relocation of those most at risk, and determine mitigation measures to enable business to continue. Options may include ignoring any demands, attempting to deflect the perpetrator(s) by entering a dialogue in order to cause a delay without actually dismissing the demand, and negotiating for local government or community support. Companies may also consider threatening to withdraw from operations in the area, thereby laying off the local workforce; this move might generate external resolutions, as a wider community is detrimentally affected. Law enforcement agency assistance may be sought, with the intention to plan an operation to arrest the perpetrator(s) during negotiations or a pretense of payment. Alternatively, modifications to operating procedures can be implemented to avoid or mitigate the risks. The IMP will assist local managers in gathering clear and detailed information as to the nature of the risk, enabling companies to quickly distinguish real from perceived risks posed by these threats, educate affected employees, as well as take remedial actions to protect staff and the business activity at risk.
0 comments:
Post a Comment