|
|
Sunday, November 22, 2009
- The Advocate eEdition
- |
- Wedding Forms
- |
- Newsletters
- |
- Text Alerts
- |
- Mobile
- |
- RSS
- |
Ethics chief says new laws crippled system
Patrick Dennis/The Advocate
“This is a convoluted and crippled ethics system we have today,” Ethics Board chairman Frank Simoneaux said Monday at the Baton Rouge Press Club. “It does not make sense. It does not work well.”
Louisiana’s ethics system has been “crippled” as a result of legal changes made during Gov. Bobby Jindal’s 2008 special session on ethics, the chairman of the Louisiana Board of Ethics said Monday.
“This is a convoluted and crippled ethics system we have today,” Ethics Board chairman Frank Simoneaux said. “It does not make sense. It does not work well.”
Simoneaux said the main culprit is a law that moved judicial power from the Ethics Board to administrative law judges, called ALJs. The ALJs are hired by an appointee of the governor.
The law stemmed from complaints from legislators and some local officials that the Ethics Board was violating due process protections sitting as both prosecutor and judge.
Simoneaux said he agrees that there should be a division of powers between prosecutorial and judicial functions. But the law goes about it in the wrong way, he said.
“Here we are today we can render (ethics) advisory opinions and the ALJs ignore them all together,” said Simoneaux. “You cannot have two bodies administering the same body of laws.”
Simoneaux also questioned the law’s requirement that the Ethics Board follow the rulings handed down by the three-judge panels.
“The Ethics Board is anchored in the constitution. Yet (the law) put the Board of Ethics in a subservient position to the ALJs. How can that be?” asked Simoneaux.
Now a Baton Rouge lawyer, Simoneaux was one of Baton Rouge’s state representatives and served as a cabinet secretary during Gov. Dave Treen’s administration.
Simoneaux told the Press Club of Baton Rouge that the issue needs to be publicly debated.
He said he has discussed the problems with Jindal administration officials and House Speaker Jim Tucker who pushed the legislation. But he said he is getting no traction and suggested “a poisonous atmosphere” exists because of some lawmaker run-ins with the Ethics Board.
Jindal declined to be interviewed on the subject. Jindal deputy chief of staff Stephen Waguespack and Tucker said they don’t understand Simoneaux’s complaints.
“It is working but there’s always an opportunity to make sure it’s working as well as it possibly can,” said Waguespack in an interview later in the day.
“It’s a new system. I think there needs to be some time to let this play out a little bit,” Waguespack said.
Tucker said the administrative law judges are issuing “well thought out, well written rulings, far better than the old board. You are also getting dissents.
“In the big picture it is much better than it was before, said Tucker, R-Terrytown, adding that if Simoneaux “is dissatisfied with the process, he needs to resign.”
Any change in the law is a legislative prerogative because a policy decision is involved, Tucker said.
Earlier, a majority of the Ethics Board asked for an independent review by the Louisiana Law Institute — a part of the legislative branch of government.
In his Press Club speech, Simoneaux said the judicial powers should be returned to the 11-member appointed Ethics Board. He proposed creation of a separate panel of retired judges or ex-district attorneys that would decide whether to prosecute cases.
“It would be a model form of ethics administration,” Simoneaux said. “It’s right within our grasp but I’m having a difficult time for people to understand it.”
Simoneaux said the Ethics Board should have the right to appeal law judge decisions — authority that is only in the law for those accused of wrongdoing.
Simoneaux said the board will soon ask the 1st Circuit Court of Appeal to allow it to appeal a decision in a case involving state Rep. Rick Gallot, D-Ruston, a Jindal ethics floorleader who was charged with conflict of interest violations. The law judges threw the Gallot case out, saying it was untimely filed.
The Ethics Board disagrees with the panel’s ruling on the timing factor and Simoneaux complained that the law is poorly written.
Simoneaux said he also finds troubling a requirement that the Ethics Board follow the law judges rulings — either by closing files in case or signing off on their decisions.
“How can I be mandated to approve something?” asked Simoneaux. “It is absolutely absurd….You are mandated to vote against your conscience.”
« Back to index
Share this:
| First Name* | |
| Last Name* | |
| Email* | |
| Comments* | |
| * required fields | |
Please enter the text in the image | |
