[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 102 (Friday, July 29, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 29, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                   PROVIDING RELIEF FOR INSLAW, INC.

  (Mr. ROSE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. ROSE. Madam Speaker, today I am introducing legislation for the 
relief of INSLAW, Inc., and William and Nancy Hamilton, the owners of 
INSLAW. These citizens have been grievously harmed by acts and 
omissions of our Government for more than a decade. Justice Department 
officials at the highest levels have taken the Hamiltons' property and 
used it without compensating them for its use and have thwarted their 
every attempt to obtain justice.
  In 1982, INSLAW won a 3-year, $10 million contract with the 
Department of Justice to install case management systems in the U.S. 
attorneys' offices. The company soon came enmeshed in a series of 
contract disputes when the Justice Department began withholding 
increasingly larger amounts of money until INSLAW was forced to file 
for chapter 11 bankruptcy in 1985. INSLAW survived bankruptcy and 
emerged from chapter 11 with a loan from the IBM Corp., an INSLAW 
business partner.
  INSLAW filed suit against the Justice Department in U.S. Bankruptcy 
Court in June 1986. On September 28, 1987, Judge George Bason of the 
Bankruptcy Court ruled that the Justice Department ``took, converted, 
stole'' INSLAW's software ``through trickery, fraud and deceit'' and 
thereafter unlawfully attempted to cause INSLAW's liquidation.
  In November 1989, senior U.S. District Judge William Bryant of the 
District of Columbia affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's $8 million 
judgment against the Justice Department, ruling that ``[t]he cold 
record adequately supports his findings under any standard of review.'' 
The U.S. District Court decision was reversed by the U.S. Court of 
Appeals for the District of Columbia in May 1991 on technical 
jurisdictional grounds. The appeals court ruled that INSLAW has 
proceeded in the wrong court.
  On September 10, 1992, the House Judiciary Committee, completing a 3-
year investigation, made the following statement in its report, House 
Report 102-857, the INSLAW Affair:

     * * * the Committee's investigation largely supports the 
     findings of two federal courts that the Department ``took, 
     converted, stole'' INSLAW's enhanced PROMIS [software] by 
     ``trickery, fraud and deceit,'' and that this 
     misappropriation involved officials at the highest levels of 
     the Department of Justice.

  According to sworn testimony before the committee, high level Justice 
Department officials conspired to steal the PROMIS software and 
secretly convert it to use the domestic and foreign intelligence 
services. The committee noted in its report:

       This testimony was provided by individuals who knew that 
     the Justice Department would be inclined to prosecute them 
     for perjury if they lied under oath. No such prosecutions 
     have occurred.

  Madam Speaker, we need to move now to refer this matter to the U.S. 
Court of Federal Claims so that the Hamiltons and INSLAW can get a fair 
hearing under the congressional reference procedure and finally obtain 
the justice which has been so long denied.

                          ____________________