Which three actions should employees be instructed to do during an internal investigation?

During an internal investigation that runs parallel to or is triggered by a law enforcement inquiry, it is critical to establish a structured and legally sound process for responding to official requests. Employees should be instructed to immediately inform the company's legal counsel of any request for documentation. This ensures that all responses are coordinated, legally reviewed, and that attorney-client privilege is not inadvertently waived. Maintaining a detailed log of all requested documents and making copies of everything provided to law enforcement are essential record-keeping practices. These actions create a clear audit trail, prevent disputes about what was provided, and support the company's own ongoing investigation.

A. Provide corporate documents directly to law enforcement: This bypasses legal and compliance oversight, risking the disclosure of privileged or irrelevant information and creating an inconsistent, untracked response to authorities.

1. ACAMS CAMS6 Study Guide (6th Edition). Chapter 4, "Responding to Law Enforcement Investigations," pp. 208-211. The guide explicitly states that upon receiving a subpoena or search warrant, institutions should notify counsel and senior management. It further details the necessity of maintaining a centralized control over the collection and provision of documents, keeping copies of all documents submitted, and maintaining a log of what was provided. This directly supports options B, C, and D, while contradicting the uncontrolled disclosure described in option A.

2. Zuckerman, P., & Spaulding, A. (2017). Internal Corporate Investigations. American Bar Association. Chapter 5, "Responding to Search Warrants and Other Government Investigatory Steps." This legal practice guide emphasizes that employees should be trained to refer all government agents to a designated company representative (typically in the legal or compliance department) and not to produce documents on their own. It also stresses the importance of creating a "shadow inventory" of all documents seized or produced, which aligns with making copies and keeping a log.

3. Arlen, J. (2012). The Law, Economics, and Psychology of Corporate Crime and Sentencing. Research Handbook on the Economics of Criminal Law, New York University School of Law. Public Law & Legal Theory Research Paper Series, Working Paper No. 12-02. This paper discusses corporate cooperation with government investigations, noting that effective cooperation requires a well-managed internal process, including centralizing communications through counsel and meticulously documenting interactions with the government to ensure compliance and protect the firm's interests. This supports the principles behind options B, C, and D.