14 January 31 2007 CZECH REPUBLIC Meeting Summary
Number of Pages:3
Date Created:January 31, 2013
Date Uploaded to the Library:February 20, 2014
Autogenerated text from PDF
The International Program Czech Republic January 31, 2007 Guests: Czech Republic Delegation The Czech Republic delegation was composed representatives from the Czech National Polices Terrorism and Extremism Unit, the Ministry Justice, the High Prosecutors Office, and the International Police Cooperation Division. Their program study while the United States was coordinated The Institute International Education (IIE), under the auspices the State Departments International Visitor Leadership Program. The Project for the Czech Delegation was titled, Combating International Crime and the U.S. Judicial System. Meetings were scheduled with various government agencies the federal, state, and local level different geographic regions the United States meet the objectives this project. The Czech officials were given the opportunity examine the relationship between legislative, judicial, and law enforcement agencies several states and compare foundational and innovative methods used these agencies combat international crime. Chris Farrell, Judicial Watchs director investigations and research, met with the delegation discuss the organizations role non-governmental agency promoting transparency and accountability government and its role investigating and prosecuting government corruption. Mr. Farrell informed the officials that Judicial Watch investigates and prosecutes government corruption through the use open records and open meetings laws, The International Program Czech Republic known the federal level the Freedom Information Act (FOIA) and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), respectively. stated that was the result Judicial Watchs FOIA requests the Commerce Department during Clintons first presidential term 1995 that came into the public eye. was through records produced the Commerce Department response Judicial Watchs FOIA requests that exposed the Clinton administrations scheme sell trade mission seats exchange for campaign contributions the DNCin direct violation campaign finance law. And during its investigation, Judicial Watch received permission from the court depose John Huang, long-time acquaintance the Clintons and chief handler the cash for access scheme. And, remarkably, Mr. Farrell told the delegates, John Huanga high ranking member the Clinton White Houseevaded service JWs deposition subpoena and sought refuge the Chinese embassy. When finally compelled appear, refused provide relevant testimony pleading the Fifth over 2300 times initial and continued depositions. Mr. Farrell stated that wasnt until Judicial Watch filed suit against Republican administration for alleged violation the federal open meetings law that became apparent that Judicial Watch, although conservative, nonpartisan its investigation and prosecution government corruption. The delegates were then provided with brief synopsis Judicial Watchs Whistleblower Protection program, where government insiders, aware unlawful practices, have gone public when their attempts alert superiors proved futile. And instead being rewarded for their forthrightness and courage, they were subjected variety retaliatory measures from harsh reprimands and isolation, reduction rank and wrongful termination. Mr. Farrell informed the delegates that JWs former whistleblower clients include INS agent, former Minister Counselor the State Department, and Special Agent the FBI. The meeting was then turned over the Czech delegates for brief question-and answer session. Inquiries were made about Judicial Watchs funding, methods investigation, and the existence other organizations similar Judicial Watch. The International Program Czech Republic Mr. Farrell informed the delegates that Judicial Watch non-profit organization supported financially through voluntary contributions from the American public, which kept informed about its activities through direct mail campaigns, monthly news publication, informational brochures, seminars, and its Internet site. Mr. Farrell told the delegates that Judicial Watch supported financially through the donations hundreds thousands ordinary citizens all across the country. the director investigations and research, Mr. Farrell said and his colleagues compile and analyze information, frequently the source and conduct interviews, review archives, take sworn statements, track down and develop witness listsand are all times proactive investigating and uncovering government corruption. Mr. Farrell closed the meeting highlighting the difference between Judicial Watch and similar non-profit public policy organizations Washington, DC. stated that unlike most other public policy groups, Judicial Watch takes its allegations wrongdoing into court law, putting its credibility the line. Many organizations take public positions, but they not litigate. Their statements and allegations therefore remain subjective and untested. Once litigation, the allegations brought Judicial Watch are subject findings fact and law. through the litigation processaccording the rule lawthat Judicial Watch holds elected and appointed government officials and judges accountable the electorate for abuse the public trust.