Several of the recent scandals that have enveloped the Christie administration involve potential violations of federal and state criminal laws, among them the apparently punitive closure of lanes leading to the world’s most heavily traveled bridge and the politically motivated allocation of federal funds for Sandy storm relief.
So, why hasn’t New Jersey’s highest law enforcement officer — the attorney general — stepped up to look into these serious allegations?
At issue is this fundamental question: Can the public trust the executive branch of government — which includes the governor and his appointed AG — to investigate itself aggressively, fairly and impartially? There are good reasons for skepticism.
Initially, the drafters of New Jersey’s constitution (which made the AG an appointed official) never anticipated the AG investigating criminal wrongdoing by those in the highest echelons of state government, such as the governor’s office. Simply put, New Jersey lacks any mechanism to address and alleviate deep conflicts of interest between the AG and his or her appointing governor.
So, there is no mystery why the AG has been reduced to a bystander as investigations swirl around Christie and his staff.
Unfortunately, the AG’s office has institutional problems that go much deeper. (Several) years ago, the incoming Corzine administration was privy to a transitional report concerning the AG’s prosecutorial arm, the Division of Criminal Justice (DCJ). This report, which has never been publicly released, described poor morale among state prosecutors and concluded that DCJ devoted inadequate resources to prosecuting political corruption.
If this report should have generated concern, the next transitional report, prepared for the incoming Christie administration, should have set off alarms.
In chilling language, the authors concluded that DCJ’s “Corruption Unit has been unable to undertake certain high profile and complex corruption prosecutions, because, allegedly attorneys and investigators have fears of political reprisals and breaches in confidentiality.” The report noted that these allegations raised “crucial integrity concerns that go to the heart of the Department’s mission and its professional credibility.”
Even assuming that the incoming AG, Paula Dow (who also helped write the report), had been motivated to address the transition team’s concerns, her two-year tenure would have made meaningful change impossible.
Consider this second remarkable fact: There have been 20 AGs since the start of Gov. Brendan Byrne’s first term in 1974, serving under him and his six successors. Christie has cycled through Dow, Jeffrey Chiesa, acting AG John Hoffman, acting AG Robert Lougy, and the recently named AG Christopher Porrino — a record number of AGs under one administration.
Is it any wonder, then, that many justifiably view the position of AG as merely an interim position filled by well-connected and ambitious lawyers? And what is the public to make of a revolving door office that lacks the consistent leadership and steady hand to guide complex prosecutions?
Yet it is hardly certain that making the AG an elected official will address these issues.
In fact, this recent initiative, though well-intentioned, may further politicize the position and create AGs whose primary focus is impressing voters rather than administering even-handed justice.
Meanwhile, reforms can be swiftly adopted within the framework of the current system that would go far in restoring confidence in the AG’s ability to combat corruption:
• Enactment of a “special prosecutor/special counsel” provision modeled after federal law.
• Civil service protection for career prosecutors to shield them from arbitrary and vindictive conduct when investigating public officials.
• The allocation of greater resources to those state agencies charged with combating corruption and better coordination between state and federal authorities.
• The creation of a permanent and independent “watchdog,” i.e., an inspector general, inside the AG’s office to monitor and respond to internal complaints of institutional wrongdoing.
• Five-year terms of office for AGs.
What is clear is that if state prosecutors are to do their jobs “without fear nor favor” when it comes to high-level public misconduct, the status quo is untenable.
Ben Barlyn is a former New Jersey deputy attorney general, past executive director of NJ Commission to Review Criminal Sentencing, and the former Hunterdon County assistant prosecutor who was terminated from his post after he alleged that an indictment was dismissed because of political pressure.
Chris Christie and Eric Jackson break ground for the construction of the new Trenton Central High School, Principal Hope Grant looks.,
