.
5/16/14, "Internal government watchdog system broken, experts say," Washington Examiner, Susan Crabtree
"The executive branch's internal oversight system is broken and Congress needs to fix it as soon as possible, several ethics experts say.
Attorneys who specialize in government ethics say the case of the Department of Homeland Security's
former acting inspector general, Charles Edwards, shows the
government's own watchdogs are too influenced by political
considerations.
Edwards is being investigated on
multiple allegations of playing politics with his investigations and
altering his reports to benefit senior executive branch officials. In
addition, the Washington Examiner has learned that earlier reports of possible misconduct were brushed aside.
It took the release of a Senate Homeland Security and Government
Affairs Committee report in late April corroborating many of the
complaints about Edwards for the Homeland Security Department to place
the 20-year career employee on administrative leave.
Inspectors general are important because they function as a first line of defense against corruption
and mismanagement within the government. Each executive branch
department and military agency has an Office of Inspector General, an
investigative arm whose mission is to root out ethical breaches or
general dysfunction. There are 73 such offices, which were created by a
1978 law.
The Senate subcommittee began its investigation into Edwards last
year when it started looking into complaints that his investigation into
the U.S. Secret Service's hiring of prostitutes during a presidential advance trip in Cartagena, Colombia, was tainted.
The subcommittee uncovered numerous allegations against Edwards —
some that pertained to his Secret Service probe and many others that
were completely unrelated.
The panel found strong evidence that Edwards was altering and
delaying investigations and reports to please political appointees at
DHS who were in a position to influence President Obama to permanently elevate him to the top post. At the time, Edwards was serving as the acting inspector general.
According to the Senate report, Edwards put three of his staff on
administrative leave after they balked when he directed them to delete parts of the office's investigation into Secret Service misconduct in
Colombia -- evidence that would have cast the Secret Service in a more
negative light, as well as implicate a White House staffer.
A senior DHS inspector general office aide also said that Edwards
ordered alterations to a March 2012 report looking into complaints that
senior DHS officials intentionally misled Congress and the public about
an Immigration and Customs Enforcement program called Secure Communities
aimed at identifying illegal immigrants.
Throughout the Senate investigation last year, Edwards was allowed to
remain as acting DHS inspector general. It was only when the Senate
Homeland Security committee was set to hold a hearing on the Edwards
matter in December that DHS transferred him to another division with the
agency.
The Washington Examiner has learned that the Council of the
Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency, a body that is charged
with watching over the inspector generals, earlier dismissed at least
two more minor complaints against Edwards and was slow to act on several
others more serious allegations.
Only after the Senate started investigating Edwards in June did the council set up an investigation of Edwards by the Transportation Department's
inspector general to prevent any conflict of interest.
Until that time,
complaints against Edwards were either dismissed or languished at the
council.
In March last year the Office of Special Counsel, an independent
agency that investigates allegations of ethics violations against
federal officials, wrote a letter to the council, outlining complaints
against Edwards, according to the Senate report.
The Senate report indicates that at least one of the allegations in
the OSC letter was potentially criminal -- that Edwards permanently
deleted 51 days of his emails between February and March 2012 in
connection with an “ongoing DOJ
investigation of an [Office of Inspector General] field office.” The
nature of the DOJ investigation of the OIG office is unclear in the
report.
Deleting emails to conceal information from a DOJ probe could be
considered obstruction of justice, which could carry criminal penalties
and fines.
The Justice Department was investigating DHS's inspector general's office in Texas for orders to falsify reports ahead of an office inspection in 2011.
A federal grand jury in Washington was convened to hear testimony
over whether agents in the DHS OIG's McAllen, Texas, field office
fabricated “investigative activity” to show progress on misconduct cases
involving Homeland Security employees, according to a report by the Center for Investigative Reporting.
The council overseeing the inspectors generals has an Integrity
Committee within it that handles allegations against inspectors general.
That committee is chaired by an FBI
designee, and the council's policies and procedure manual dictates that
any allegation of potential criminal conduct should be referred to the
Public Integrity Section of the DOJ.
A council spokesman referred questions to the Integrity Committee.
Chris Allen, a spokesman for the Integrity Committee, who also works
at the FBI, said the FBI designee is only required to refer an
allegation that is criminal in nature. He did not respond to a follow-up
question about whether Edwards' alleged deletion of emails would meet
that threshold.
A Justice Department spokesman said the department has a policy of
neither confirming nor denying whether a matter is under investigation.
Cheri Cannon, a partner at Tully Rinckey, a Washington, D.C., federal
employment law firm who has worked with government ethics issues as a
former senior Air Force
executive civilian personnel lawyer, said the Integrity Committee
should have referred the complaint that Edwards deleted months of emails
related to a DOJ investigation, to DOJ's Public Integrity section.
“This referral should have been done, but it's not clear that it was done,” she said.
The lack of accountability demonstrated in Edwards' case is extremely troubling, she said.
As the top acting watchdog for DHS, “Edwards is a senior executive
who is held to a higher standard than General Schedule employees, and
his integrity and ethics should be beyond reproach,” she said.
“To simply reassign Edwards to another [career government] job,
without proposing disciplinary action — a suspension or removal from
federal service — for documented and substantiated federal ethics
violations, is not what the American public deserves,” she said.
The allegations leveled against Edwards in the Senate report have
given watchdog groups new evidence for their concern about President
Obama's failure to fill inspector-general vacancies.
Edwards was serving
as an acting inspector general for three years because Obama did not
nominate someone for the top Senate-confirmed position.
There are currently nine inspector general vacancies throughout the executive branch, including at
the Interior Department,
the Agency for International Development and
the Financial Deposit Insurance Corp.
Stan Brand, a Democratic ethics attorney, says the problems with the
IG process far exceed the vacancies issue. Inspectors general are paid
through the same department budget as senior officials within the same
agency, he said. He also pointed out that the Council for Inspectors
General on Integrity and Efficiency usually only meets four times a year
and lacks the tools to investigate and hold inspectors general
accountable for abuses.
“There's too much layering — it's a structural problem,” he said.
“The IGs work within the framework of their individual agencies while
they are supposed to be independent because they are, in effect,
employees of those agencies.”
“They often respond to or are sensitive to the [department]
secretary's office in a way that outside, independent investigators
wouldn't be,” he added. “It's a structural problem, and Congress needs
to sort it out because it's a mess.”
Saturday, May 17, 2014
US Government internal watchdog system completely broken, repairs urgently needed say experts. Cite DHS IG Charles Edwards altering reports to benefit sr. officials, deleting emails in DOJ investigation, top officials ignored or were slow to act on complaints about Edwards, at least 1 of which was potentially criminal
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment