Defense Disputes Knowledge, Government Ties
Hobson’s attorneys argued he neither authorized nor knew of any bribes. They maintained he did not instruct his Egyptian agent to pay off officials and did not understand Al Nasr to be a government-affiliated entity when it purchased coal from Corsa.
The defense also challenged the prosecution’s legal foundation, disputing whether Al Nasr qualified as an “instrumentality” of the Egyptian government under the FCPA — a key requirement of the statute. They further questioned expert testimony asserting that bribery is illegal under Egyptian law.
An essential component of the FCPA is that bribes must be directed to a government official or someone acting on behalf of a state-controlled entity. Prosecutors insisted the state-controlled coal and chemicals company met that definition.
Trial Resumed After Enforcement Pause
Hobson’s trial had initially been delayed after President Donald Trump signed an executive order calling for a review of existing FCPA cases, arguing that overbroad enforcement hindered U.S. companies competing overseas.
The case, however, ultimately proceeded, and trial began Feb. 9.
Without testimony from Hobson’s alleged Egyptian co-conspirators — who were believed to be in custody in Egypt, according to pretrial filings — prosecutors leaned heavily on other evidence. That included testimony from Hobson’s successor at Corsa, who admitted to continuing the scheme and pleaded guilty under a cooperation agreement.
Investigators also presented dozens of messages exchanged between Hobson and his agent, Ahmed Nassar. The communications appeared to intertwine discussions about coal pricing with references to splitting commissions and ensuring payments to members of Nassar’s “team” to maintain contracts shipping coal to Egypt.
Some messages referenced “H.H.” as sharing in the commissions, amounts prosecutors said aligned with the money Hobson allegedly received.
