|
Several statutes, mostly codified in Title 18 of the United States Code, provide for federal prosecution of public corruption in the United States. Federal prosecutions of public corruption under the Hobbs Act (enacted 1934), the mail and wire fraud statutes (enacted 1872), including the honest services fraud provision, the Travel Act (enacted 1961), and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) (enacted 1970) began in the 1970s. "Although none of these statutes was enacted in order to prosecute official corruption, each has been interpreted to provide a means to do so."〔Whitaker, 1992, at 1617.〕 The federal official bribery and gratuity statute, 18 U.S.C. § 201 (enacted 1962), the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) (enacted 1977), and the federal program bribery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 666 (enacted 1984) directly address public corruption. The statutes differ in their jurisdictional elements, the mens rea that they require (for example, a quid pro quo or a nexus), the species of official actions that are cognizable, whether or not non-public official defendants can be prosecuted, and in the authorized sentence. The statutes most often used to prosecute public corruption are the Hobbs Act, Travel Act, RICO, the program bribery statute, and mail and wire fraud statutes.〔 These statutes have been upheld as exercises of Congress's Commerce Clause power, or in the case of the mail fraud and program bribery statutes, the Postal Clause and the Spending Clause, respectively. In the special case where a member of Congress is the defendant, the Speech or Debate Clause places certain restrictions on the actions that can be prosecuted and proved up. Some commentators have argued that prosecutions of state and local officials under these statutes pose substantial federalism questions, while others argue that the Guarantee Clause provides additional authority for such prosecutions. ==History== Article Two, Section Four of the United States Constitution provides that: "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, ''Bribery'', or other High crimes and Misdemeanors."〔 Art II, § 4 (emphasis added).〕 For a time in the early history of the country, corrupt public officials could be charged with the common law crimes related to corruption; such crimes could continue to be charged in the D.C. circuit court, where the laws of Maryland and Virginia remained in force, even after the Supreme Court's decision abolishing federal common law crimes in ''United States v. Hudson'' (1812).〔Ex parte Watkins, 32 U.S. (7 Pet.) 568 (1833) (common law crime of fraud); Ex parte Watkins, 28 U.S. (3 Pet.) 193 (1830) (same); United States v. More, 7 U.S. (3 Cranch) 159 (1805) (indictment for common law crime of exacting illegal fees under color of office); United States v. Worrall, 28 F. Cas. 774 (C.C.D. Pa. 1798) (conviction for common law crime of bribery).〕 The First Congress passed the "first federal law against bribery" in 1789, which provided that bribed customs officers would be disqualified from office and payors would be liable for the amount of the bribe.〔Schroth, 2006, at 554 (citing Act of July 31, 1789, ch. 5, § 35, 1 Stat. 29, 46–47).〕 The judicial bribery provision of the Crimes Act of 1790, passed the following year, provided for disqualification, and a fine and imprisonment "at the discretion of the court," for both the judge and the payor.〔Schroth, 2006, at 554–55 (citing Crimes Act of 1790, ch. 9, § 21, 1 Stat. 112, 117).〕 The Crimes Act of 1825 added the offenses of extortion under color of office, theft or embezzlement by a Second Bank employee, and coin embezzlement or dilution by a Mint employee.〔Crimes Act of 1825, ch. 65, §§ 12, 16, 24, 4 Stat. 115, 118, 120, 122.〕 The mail fraud statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1341, "()he oldest statute used to address public corruption," was enacted in 1872 and first used against public corruption in the 1940s.〔Carey et al., 1991, at 318 (citing Shushan v. United States, 117 F.2d 110 (5th Cir. 1941)).〕 While several early cases employed the "intangible right to honest government," ''United States v. States'' (8th Cir. 1973)〔United States v. States, 488 F.2d 761 (8th Cir. 1973).〕 was the first case to rely on honest services fraud as the sole basis for a conviction.〔Carey et al., 1991, at 318.〕 The prosecution of state and local political corruption became a "major federal law enforcement priority" in the 1970s.〔Baxter, 1983, at 321.〕 ''United States v. Addonizio'' (3d Cir. 1971)〔United States v. Addonizio, 451 F.2d 49 (3d Cir. 1971).〕 and ''United States v. Kenny'' (3d Cir. 1972)〔United States v. Kenny, 462 F.2d 1205 (3d Cir. 1972).〕—both brought by U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, Herbert Jay Stern (later a federal judge)—were the first prosecution of political corruption pursuant to the economic fear prong and the "under color of official right" prong of the Hobbs Act, respectively.〔Henderson, 1977, at 386–88.〕 Henderson describes these cases as the "New Jersey breakthroughs."〔Henderson, 1977, at 388 n.9.〕 In 1976, the Public Integrity Section was established within United States Department of Justice Criminal Division with general supervisory jurisdiction over public corruption offenses.〔Ruff, 1977, at 1208.〕 By 1977, "()he four United States attorney's offices most active in this field—the Southern District of New York, New Jersey, Maryland, and the Northern District of Illinois—" had "developed coteries of high skilled prosecutors and a tradition of success that encourages an atmosphere of alertness to potential corruption cases."〔Ruff, 1977, at 1211.〕 In 1977, Thomas H. Henderson, Jr., the Chief of the Public Integrity Section, wrote: :Until recently, the full panoply of potential federal resources had not been brought to bear effectively on corruption schemes at the state and local level. These schemes are at least as corrosive of the governmental process as corruption at the federal level. From the time of Tammany Hall this country has been painfully aware of the existence of corrupt practices in many of our metropolitan areas, and of the "machines" and "rings" which siphon off millions of dollars from public treasuries for private gain. Most state and local prosecutors, beset by inadequate resources and the overwhelming demands of a rising rate of street crime, are simply unable to deal with this type of corruption. Moreover, in some cases, local law enforcement is part and parcel of the problem itself, due to the outright corruption of its own establishment. :To fill this enforcement role, federal prosecutors during the last decade began to assume a much more active and creative role in attempting to use federal statutes to attack corruption at the state and local level.〔Henderson, 1977, at 386 (footnote omitted).〕 In 1976, there were 337 indictments of state and local officials for public corruption, compared to 63 in 1970.〔Ruff, 1977, at 1172 n.1.〕 Between 1970 and 1981, there were 520 federal indictments of state officials, and 1,757 indictments of local officials, for public corruption; over that period, 369 state officials, and 1,290 local officials, were convicted.〔Fleissner, 1985, at 1066 n.1 (citing , at 20 (1982)).〕 In 1986, there were 916 indictments of public officials for corruption, 320 of which concerned state and local officials.〔Kurland, 1989, at 369 n.3.〕 In 1990, there were 968 such indictments, 353 of which were against state and local officials.〔Whitaker, 1992, at 1617 n.1.〕 The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1, was passed in 1977. The program bribery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 666, was passed in 1984.〔 In the program bribery statute, "Congress, for the first time, directly federalized the crime of bribery of or by local officials."〔Carey et al., 1991, at 322.〕 For example, between 1985 and 1991, over 75 public officials were convicted of corruption offenses in the Southern District of West Virginia alone.〔Carey et al., 1991, at 302.〕 By comparison, the only appellate court decision citing West Virginia's Bribery and Corrupt Practices Act, in 1991, was a federal court decision involving the state statute as a federal RICO predicate.〔Carey et al., 1991, at 304.〕 And it goes much deeper than that. There have been many cases filed against corruption and other crimes by former agents who commit crimes, as well as attorneys, judges, etc. that can be easily found online, although the option of finding those actual cases continues to diminish even further, in preferential interests of commerce and social media markets taking precedence. Internet searches are becoming intentionally narrowed to restrict citizen's awareness of such corruption. Stonewalling by both media and law-enforcement in failing to implement the very legislation they create at tax-payer expense, continues unabated in many cases that can be found online. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Federal prosecution of public corruption in the United States」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|