Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][merged small][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]
[blocks in formation]

The Senate Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management will hold an oversight hearing on the Office of Government Ethics on Tuesday, April 2. The hearing will focus on the OGE's performance of its duties under Title IV of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978. The Subcommittee will also examine the implementation of the post-employment conflict-of-interest provisions of the Ethics Act and the status of the confidential financial disclosure system. The hearing will begin at 9:30 a.m. in room 366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

I ask that the appropriate official of the Department of Justice appear before the Subcommittee to address the Department's views on the confidential financial disclosure system and the enforcement of the "revolving door" provisions of the Ethics Act. Specifically, I ask that the testimony discuss the following issues:

[blocks in formation]

The Honorable Edwin Meese, III
March 21, 1985
Page Two

(3)

(4)

How many prosecutions have been brought
by the Department of Justice against
Executive Branch officials or employees
for alleged violations of 18 U.S.C. $207,
the post-employment conflict-of-interest
provisions, since 1980? Please briefly
describe the facts and outcome of each case.

How many alleged violations of 18 U.S.C.
$207 have been referred to the Department
since 1980 but did not result in prosecu-
tion?

In order to allow adequate time for questions from the Subcommittee members, I request that the Department's witness summarize the written testimony for oral presentation. Three copies of the written statement should be delivered to the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, room 326 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, by close of business on Friday, March 29. I also ask that the Department provide the Subcommittee with 50 additional copies of its statement on April 1, the day before the hearing.

If

Thank you for your assistance to the Subcommittee. you have any questions, please have your staff contact Mary Gerwin or Susan Collins of the Subcommittee staff at 224-5538.

WSC:mbg

Sincerely,

Bill For

William S. Cohen
Chairman

[blocks in formation]

This letter responds to your March 21, 1985 request to the Attorney General that the Department of Justice respond to several questions you have posed in anticipation of an oversight hearing on the Office of Government Ethics on April 2, 1985. Our responses to these questions are provided below.

I.

What are the Department's views on the
legal authority for and enforceability of
confidential financial disclosure filing
requirements in executive branch agen-
cies? Please discuss any opinions that
the Department has rendered to federal
agencies concerning the confidential
financial disclosure system.

It is the view of the Department of Justice, as expressed in memoranda by the Office of Legal Counsel, that title II of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (the Act) superseded any general statutory or nonstatutory financial disclosure reporting systems in effect prior to the Act. This view is derived from section 207(c) of the Act, which provides in relevant part:

The provisions of this title requiring
the reporting of information shall super-
sede any general requirement under any
other provision of law or regulation with
respect to the reporting of information
required for purposes of preventing con-
flicts of interest or apparent conflicts
of interest.

Based on this language and relevant legislative history, the Department has concluded that the confidential reporting system for Executive Branch officials established by Executive Order No. 11222 was superseded by the Ethics in Government Act. Pursuant to title II of the Act, however, "[t]he President may require officers and employees in the executive branch not covered by this title to submit confidential reports in such form as is required by this title." See 5 U.S.C. App. $ 207(a). It has therefore been our view that a confidential reporting system for the Executive Branch may be established by a new Executive Order or other presidential

directive.

[blocks in formation]

In December 1983, the Office of Legal Counsel informed the Department's Designated Agency Ethics Official that confidential financial statements should not be collected unless a new reporting system is prescribed by the President. Since then, the Department has not mandated the collection of confidential disclosure statements from its employees.

III.

How many prosecutions have been brought
by the Department of Justice against
Executive Branch officials or employees
for alleged violations of 18 U.S.c.
S 207, the post-employment conflict-of-
interest provisions, since 1980? Please
briefly describe the facts and outcome
of each case.

The Public Integrity Section of the Criminal Division has prosecuted two section 207 matters administratively under 18 U.S.C. $ 207(j) and 28 C.F.R. § 45.735-7a. The Section has brought no criminal prosecutions under section 207 in the period of interest to the Subcommittee.

The first 207(j) prosecution was brought in 1983 against a former Assistant United States Attorney who represented a federal parolee before U.S. Parole Commission officials in a parole revocation proceeding. This proceeding was related to

« AnteriorContinuar »