Answer:
C. sedative
Explanation:
This is also referring to something above
Answer:
a. financial statement disclosure requirements
d. requirement of monitoring contracts with foreign agents
Explanation:
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act was an act that was passed in 1977 and received two amendments in 1988 and 1998. The act aims to prohibit companies and their officers from influencing foreign officials with payments and rewards - bribery. The act also has a series of accounting requirements that are designed to ensure that shareholders have an accurate view of the company’s finances.
Answer:
Defendant
Explanation:
A Defendant is a judiciary term used to describe the individual, firm, or organization being sued or accused by the plaintiff in court under the existing law of the place, state or region, or nation where the incident occurs.
The defendant is known to have some specific rights and obligations during the legal proceedings in a court of law. These rights and responsibilities include the following:
1. Defendants may choose to represent themselves
2. Defendant may decide to selecting or retaining counsel.
3. Defendant may choose what information to provide or withhold from the defense team.
4. Defendants may decide what to plead, if they want to testify, and if they want to file an appeal.
Stanford v. Kentucky, was a United States Supreme Court case in the year 1989 that sanctioned the imposition of the death penalty on offenders who were at least 16 years of age at the time of the crime.
The Supreme Court in the year 2005,while handling the Roper v. Simmons' case ruled that the death penalty is a disproportionate punishment for juveniles, and thus it violates the Eighth Amendment to impose a death sentence on a youthful murderer who committed the crime before age 18.
Christopher Simmons, who was 17 at the time, committed a crime that led to a death sentence.
The Court said that the society views juveniles as categorically less culpable than the average criminal. The supreme court argued than a man only becomes culpable of any criminal act when he reaches the age of 18, and claimed at imposing a death penalty on a young child who is not old enough to take charge of his own actions is wrong.
The supreme court claimed that a juvenile who committed a heinous crime can be made to forfeit his fundamental rights rather than being murdered.
