The U.S Supreme Court has severely restricted the ability of federal prosecutors to bring corruption cases against public officials and corporate executives. The court unanimously imposed stark limits on the so-called honest services law that for decades has been a key tool in prosecuting corruption cases.
The court's ruling came in the case of former Enron executive Jeffrey Skilling, convicted of engaging in a scheme to enrich himself by deceiving shareholders about his company's true financial condition. He was convicted of a variety of charges, including depriving the Enron investors of his honest services.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court ruled that the definition of honest services in federal law was so broad that, if viewed literally, it would be unconstitutionally vague, providing inadequate notice to citizens about what conduct is legal and what is not. Instead, a six-justice majority led by Ruth Bader Ginsburg declined to invalidate the law outright, but read it narrowly to cover only bribery and kickbacks.
In view of the history of the statute, she said, "there is no doubt that Congress intended [it] to reach at least bribes and kickbacks." To do more, Ginsburg added, without explicit authorization from Congress, would exceed the court's authority. Three other justices — Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas — would have, for all practical purposes, invalided the statute in its entirety.
Implications Of Ruling
For Skilling and many others, the court's decision may mean invalidation of some counts on which they were convicted, while leaving intact other charges that did not involve the honest services statute. The high court sent Skilling's case and a companion case involving Canadian media magnate Conrad Black back to the lower courts for further action.
Jacob Frenkel, a defense lawyer and former prosecutor, says the problem for Skilling and Black is that they were convicted of charges other than honest services fraud.
"Even if the honest services fraud counts are thrown out, they're going to continue to be guests of the United States Bureau of Prisons because the other convictions likely will continue to stand," Frenkel said.
Not everyone will stay in prison, though. Former prosecutors estimate that Thursday's decision may well invalidate hundreds of honest services convictions. Among those who are likely to challenge their convictions under the decision are two former governors, three former members of Congress and a variety of high-profile corporate executives.
~ more... ~
No comments:
Post a Comment