Short Dossier Internal Investigations
Legally guided internal investigations – analytical, independent, defensible towards the outside.
Internal investigations operate in a field of tension between criminal law, labour law, compliance, corporate politics and public perception. They can protect a company – or damage it permanently if they are set up the wrong way.
I do not run my own investigation or security firm and I do not sell “investigation products”. Where surveillance, IT forensics or broader operational measures are needed, I deliberately bring in external specialists.
In particularly sensitive interview situations – for example with suspects or key persons – I consciously conduct the conversations myself. This is where my experience as a criminal lawyer and my ability to think non-linearly across several causal strands and levels, combined with psychologically alert interviewing, come into play in order to make contradictions, protective narratives and hidden motives visible.
Who this short dossier is for
This short dossier is aimed at boards, managing directors, general counsel, compliance, HR and internal audit – in other words, at those who decide whether an internal investigation is initiated, how it is steered and how its results are to be represented inside and outside the organisation.
Internal investigations are not an end in themselves. They are an instrument with which you intervene in sensitive situations – and later have to explain to supervisory bodies, authorities and the public why you acted as you did.
- Boards and managing directors
when there are indications of criminal or seriously improper behaviour within the company. - General counsel / legal departments
who must embed, coordinate and defend internal investigations vis-à-vis the authorities. - Compliance and internal audit
when hints from whistleblower systems, audits or controls need to be examined in depth.
- HR and people functions
in cases of mobbing, harassment, discrimination or other serious breaches of duty. - Supervisory board / audit committee
when they need their own view of how critical matters have been dealt with internally.
Typical triggers for internal investigations
I am usually brought into Internal-Investigations mandates when there are indications that can neither be ignored nor “clarified informally in the corridor”.
- Corruption, breach of trust, fraud, embezzlement
for example conspicuous patterns in accounting, payments, procurement or commission structures. - Hints from whistleblower systems
which allege serious misconduct but are not yet clearly classified. - Mobbing, harassment, discrimination
with significant escalation potential – internally, under labour law and in the media. - Espionage and trade secrets
in cases of leakage of data, technical information or confidential business documents. - Violations with potential criminal liability
e.g. export control violations, sanctions issues, environmental offences, IT-related crime. - Parallel or looming criminal proceedings
when it is clear that internal investigations may “feed into” external proceedings.
My role in internal investigations
I work as an independent lawyer and strategic crisis analyst – not as a security service provider or consultant who sells as many measures as possible. My task is to structure internal investigations so that they are sustainable internally and defensible externally.
- Architect of the investigation structure
designing the investigation architecture: what is examined, in what order, by which means and by whom. - Interface to the outside world
embedding the internal investigation in the environment of authorities, regulators, works councils, professional bodies and – where relevant – media. - Safeguarding fairness and proportionality
protecting the rights of employees and avoiding “parallel justice”.
- Analytical framework
using my analytical lens to structure hypothesis spaces, causal strands and scenarios. - Key interviews
personally conducting particularly sensitive interviews – where interviewing technique, psychology and strategic line are inseparable. - Reporting capability
preparing results in a form that can stand before supervisory bodies and law enforcement authorities.
Working method in Internal-Investigations mandates
The aim is to turn a burdensome suspicion into a clearly structured situation with actionable options – without pushing the company into unnecessary side crises.
- Confidential orientation discussion
initial clarification: what is known, what is assumption, what is at stake? Which internal and external stakeholders are affected (e.g. works council, supervisory bodies, authorities)? - Spanning hypothesis spaces
structuring the range of what may have happened; identifying the key questions and the information needed to test the hypotheses. - Measures plan
defining the necessary steps: interviews, data preservation, document review, coordination with HR and the works council, and – where appropriate – engaging external specialists. - Evaluation and decision architecture
condensing the results into a situational picture and scenarios: which consequences are conceivable, which measures are proportionate, which communication internally and externally is appropriate?
The analytical structure behind this working method is described in more detail in the Dossier Analytical Working Method.
Differentiation from classic consulting offerings
Internal investigations are often offered by larger consulting firms, law firms or audit firms. My approach differs from these in several important respects.
- No investigation business, but a legal mandate
I do not run my own investigation firm. External investigators, forensics experts and security providers are involved only where they are genuinely necessary. - No “measure logic”
there is no incentive to sell “one more interview” or “one more module”. The benchmark is what is required for fact-finding and future defensibility. - Analytical rather than schematic
no checklist investigation; the analytical lens replaces standard patterns and adapts the structure of the investigation to the concrete situation.
- Respect for those affected
employees are not “material”. Internal investigations must respect the rights and dignity of those involved, otherwise they themselves become a risk. - Defensibility in view
the internal investigation should not only “look good” internally, but also hold up in later proceedings. - Discretion instead of PR
internal investigations are not a PR instrument. The goal is clarity, not the staging of determination.
Three sentences that describe my approach in internal investigations
- He structures internal investigations so that they are sustainable internally and defensible externally.
- He is not an investigation service provider but a lawyer – he conducts critical interviews himself and steers broader measures.
- He thinks in hypothesis spaces and causal strands rather than checklists – and maintains the line even when things get confusing.
Contact for an orientation discussion
If you are reading this short dossier, your company may be facing indications that cannot be ignored – but should also not be escalated carelessly. A confidential orientation discussion can help to sort the situation analytically and avoid typical wrong turns.
I am available for an initial confidential conversation – by phone, video or in person.
Contact:
E-mail: martin@heynert.com
Phone: Office +49.391.5982-243, Mobile +49.171.4135269