[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 26 (Thursday, March 9, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1380-S1381]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PARDON ATTORNEY REFORM AND INTEGRITY ACT
Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, a few weeks ago Senator Hatch, Senator
Nickles, and I, along with other Senators, introduced S. 2042, the
Pardon Attorney Reform and Integrity Act. The Judiciary Committee has
now reported this legislation to the floor. I wanted to say just a few
words about why I believe this legislation is needed and why I hope the
Senate will act quickly.
Last September, President Clinton decided to grant clemency to 11
members of the Puerto Rican terrorist groups FALN and Los Macheteros.
When this decision became known, it was greeted with virtually
universal shock and disbelief, followed by calls for the President to
reconsider and ultimately by near universal condemnation. The FALN had
been involved in numerous terrorist acts. The most heinous of these
acts was the bombing of Fraunces Tavern in New York City. In the middle
of the lunch time rush at this Wall Street tavern, FALN members planted
a bomb. The explosion killed four people and left 55 people wounded. In
addition, FALN has taken credit for more than 130 bombings, attempted
bombings, bomb threats and kidnapings. They took credit for the bombing
of office buildings in New York and Chicago where at least one other
person was killed and several more injured.
Although it has been suggested that the individuals the President
pardoned were not convicted of direct involvement in these acts, the
conduct that they were convicted of made clear that they all played
important roles in facilitating the activities of the organization,
fully aware that the entity in question engaged in just this kind of
conduct. Despite this, there is no evidence that any of them are
seriously remorseful about their serious wrongdoing. Singling them out
for the extraordinary favor of Presidential clemency is, under these
circumstances, frankly inexplicable.
Both this body and the House of Representatives passed resolutions
stating our disapproval of the President's action. Following these
events, the Committee on the Judiciary held two hearings on how the
President had made his decision. In the first of these hearings, it was
discovered that Reverend Ikuta, a supporter of clemency for the
terrorists, had several meetings with the Department of Justice
concerning the potential grant of clemency. At the same time, law
enforcement officials, who attempted to contact the President and the
Department of Justice concerning the clemency, received no response
from the administration. Nor were the victims consulted in any way. The
son of one of the victims of the Fraunces Tavern bombing was told in
1998 by the FBI that they were still searching for the FALN member
thought to have planted the bomb. Meanwhile, the President was
considering granting clemency to individuals who not only were members
of the group responsible for the bomb in the first place, but also who
may have had information about the whereabouts of this primary suspect.
The victims of the terrorists' acts were never even informed of the
President's grant of clemency. They had to read it in the newspaper.
Perhaps the gravest oversight of all is that the terrorists were never
asked to provide any information about other FALN members who are still
on the FBI most wanted list.
The goal of this bill is to try to do what Congress can to prevent
this situation from recurring. The bill would require the Department of
Justice, if asked to investigate a pardon request, to make all
reasonable efforts to inform the victims that a pardon request is being
reviewed and give the victims an opportunity to present their views.
The Department is also required to notify the victims of a decision to
grant clemency as soon as practical after it is made and, if it will
result in the release of someone, before release of that person if
practicable. The bill also requires that the Department of Justice make
all reasonable efforts to determine the views of law enforcement on
whether the person has accepted responsibility for his or her actions
and whether the person is a danger to any person or society. Finally
the Department must determine from federal, state and local law
enforcement whether the person may have information relevant to any
ongoing investigation, prosecution, or effort to apprehend a fugitive,
and to determine the effect of a grant of clemency on the threat of
terrorism or future criminal activity.
Opponents of this bill argue that it is an unconstitutional
infringement on the Presidential pardon power. This is not so. This
bill dictates a process to be used when the President delegates
investigatory power to the Department of Justice. Accordingly, this
bill is not a usurpation of the President's pardon power, but within
the legitimate exercise of Congress's power, in establishing the
Department of Justice, to ``make all laws which are necessary and
proper for carrying into Execution'' not only the powers vested in
Congress but also ``all other powers vested by this Constitution in the
Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer
thereof.'' The President's own freedom to exercise the pardon power
however he sees fit is in no way infringed by this bill. In fact, this
bill only acts to ensure that the President has the information before
[[Page S1381]]
him to make a well rounded and informed decision. The President can
ignore the information provided by the victims and the law enforcement
officers if he chooses to do so. I would hope that he would not. But
while requirements that would force him to give particular weight to
their views would most likely be unconstitutional, requiring the
Department to make this information available to him, for whatever use
he chooses to make of it, surely is not. Indeed, the President and the
Department of Justice should be supportive of this bill as it should
help return to the American people confidence in the clemency process
that may have been lost following the release of the FALN and Los
Macheteros terrorists.
It is unconscionable that in this instance, the views of the victims
and law enforcement officers, the parties most affected by both the
criminal act and the clemency, were ignored in the decision making
process. This bill goes a long way in helping to prevent a recurrence
of the defects in process in President Clinton's grant of clemency last
September to the 11 terrorists. It will enhance the quality of
information available so as to ensure a more balanced basis for the
President's decisions regarding clemency. I am, therefore, pleased the
committee has reported this legislation to the floor of the Senate, and
I urge its prompt enactment.
____________________