Grand jury should be left alone

Published By Times Herald
Posted: 05/15/2011 01:01:33 AM PDT

In California, grand juries are essentially watchdog groups that keep an eye on public officials and the public policy decisions they make. The only real power of grand juries is in exposing wrongdoing and bad judgment by government leaders.

Grand juries also offer critiques of public policies and make recommendations on what they believe is the best course of action.

The findings and suggestions of grand juries are not binding, but they can shed light on wrongheaded decisions and the negative results that are likely to follow. ...

Despite the value of grand juries, there is legislation, Assembly Bill 622, that would seriously undermine their effectiveness as public watchdogs.

Most significantly, AB 622 would require a grand jury session in which testimony under oath is heard to be open to the public and for witnesses to have counsel present.

The California District Attorneys Association, understandably, is strongly opposed to the bill. It argues that grand jury proceedings should remain closed because opening investigations to the public makes it hard for witnesses to be willing to come forward and may inhibit a witness from giving totally candid testimony.

To attract whistle-blowers and other witnesses with sensitive and potentially damaging information, proceedings need to be kept secret. Open session clearly would diminish the effectiveness of grand juries.

Obviously, the California Grand Jurors' Association is against AB 622, saying open sessions "would gut the power of the grand jury to investigate possible misconduct by local public officials." Public sessions would discourage whistle-blowers, who fear the very real possibility of retaliation.

We agree.

A grand jury session is not a trial, where an arrested person who has been charged with a crime is facing a penalty if found guilty. It is an investigation that requires protection of whistle-blowers and witnesses to come forward and testify in a confidential manner.

If charges are warranted against a government official, he or she will then have the right to a public trial.

Even when a grand jury has no expectation of charging anyone with wrongdoing, witnesses in a grand jury session should not be exposed to public scrutiny, especially if they are offering information that could expose a lack of professionalism or error by their superiors or an elected official.

While we highly value transparency in government, it is not appropriate during an investigation that relies on candid testimony by witnesses who are at risk of retaliation. If charges are filed as a result of a grand jury investigation, only then is secrecy no longer appropriate.

-- MediaNews Group

http://www.timesheraldonline.com/ci_18068065