Former Deutsche Bank trader cleared in benchmark rate rigging case
Christian Bittar, a former Deutsche Bank trader, has become the eighth person to have his conviction for rigging interest rates quashed. His acquittal comes just days after five other former Barclays bankers also had their convictions overturned. These recent victories follow a significant Supreme Court ruling that found trial judges had given "inaccurate and unfair" jury instructions in the original cases.
Bittar was convicted in 2018 of conspiracy to defraud in relation to the rigging of benchmark interest rates. The five Barclays traders cleared on Wednesday also faced charges concerning the manipulation of such rates. The rigging of these benchmark rates affected the value of ordinary people's pensions, mortgages and savings, as well as hundreds of trillions of pounds and euros worth of financial products globally. The Serious Fraud Office contested Bittar's appeal but lost, marking a further setback for the prosecution.
- Christian Bittar becomes eighth person to have rate-rigging conviction quashed
- Acquittals follow Supreme Court ruling that found unfair jury instructions
- Five Barclays traders also cleared this week; ninth trader plans to appeal
New here? Start with this
Benchmark interest rates are reference figures set regularly and used to calculate the cost of trillions of pounds worth of loans, investments and financial products around the world. These rates determine how much ordinary people pay on mortgages, what they earn on savings and pensions, and what businesses pay to borrow money. Manipulating these rates, even slightly, can cost savers and borrowers large sums.
Starting in the years after the 2008 financial crisis, traders at several major banks, including Deutsche Bank and Barclays, were convicted of deliberately rigging these benchmark rates to profit from their own trading positions. The practice affected the value of financial products worth hundreds of trillions of pounds and euros globally. Multiple traders from different banks received convictions relating to this scheme.
The Supreme Court recently ruled that judges at the original trials had given juries inaccurate and unfair instructions, meaning the convictions are unsafe and can be overturned. This legal finding has led to a series of successful appeals by convicted traders. The Serious Fraud Office, which prosecuted the original cases, has contested these appeals but lost.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
When the Supreme Court identifies that jury instructions were inaccurate and unfair, overturning convictions becomes essential to preserve the rule of law. Allowing convictions to stand despite such judicial error would risk imprisoning innocent people based on flawed legal process and would corrode the legitimacy of the entire criminal justice system. Procedural fairness is not a technicality that defendants exploit; it is the foundation that protects innocent people and maintains public confidence in courts.
The case against
Benchmark rate rigging caused millions of ordinary people documented harm through reduced pensions and increased mortgages, yet multiple convictions being overturned on procedural grounds means defendants escape accountability whilst victims receive no recompense. When well-resourced defendants can exploit procedural issues to evade consequences for serious misconduct that caused widespread harm, it raises legitimate questions about whether procedural law protects ordinary people or shields the powerful from accountability.
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by The Guardian as “Christian Bittar has conviction for rigging interest rates quashed”.