Legislature Prepares Contempt Measures Against Former Officials

Opposition lawmakers in the country’s legislature have reportedly remained largely silent about whether they will support ruling party efforts to advance contempt resolutions against two former high-ranking officials, according to local media reports.

The lower chamber’s oversight committee is scheduled to convene at 10 a.m. to consider a pair of reports on holding the former head of state and a former top diplomat in contempt of the legislative body for allegedly defying subpoenas in the panel’s investigation into a high-profile corruption case. Hours of debate are expected to be followed by votes on whether to advance those reports as chamber-wide votes on resolutions referring the former officials to the justice ministry for criminal prosecution.

The resolutions are likely to advance, at least along party lines, observers note. However, two opposition lawmakers on the committee who spoke with media outlets on Tuesday were reportedly careful to avoid making concrete decisions before the pivotal votes.

“Right now, we should all be focused on releasing the files,” one opposition lawmaker from a western coastal region told reporters. “After the files are released, call in [the former officials], and they should testify, as should anyone. But it’s premature to be calling in people to testify when the files haven’t been released.”

The lawmaker, along with a ruling party colleague from a southern state, had previously led a successful effort to force a vote mandating that the justice ministry release nearly all of its files related to the corruption investigation. The ministry has yet to produce more than a fraction of the documents, however, more than a month after the deadline set by the legislature.

When asked directly how he would vote regarding the former officials on Wednesday, the opposition lawmaker said, “I would say that they need to come in after the files are released.”

Another opposition member of the committee, a first-term lawmaker from an eastern region, told media when asked how he’ll vote, “We’ll see how they’re treating all of the other people who have not complied completely with the committee, because I think what they’ve started doing is making this partisan.”

The former officials were reportedly two of 10 people subpoenaed to appear before the committee after a unanimous committee vote to launch the investigation. To date, however, just one of those original 10 people — a former attorney general — has appeared in person. A former cabinet secretary was also deposed pursuant to a separate subpoena.

But the two former officials are the only ones so far who ruling party members have pursued contempt charges against, arguing they have repeatedly refused to work with the committee in good faith on scheduling their depositions. The officials’ lawyers said the subpoenas are allegedly not legally valid.

“It should be an interesting hearing, because if they’re going to hold [the former officials] in contempt, I’m interested to hear if they’ll hold anyone else in contempt, including [ruling party members] in this administration,” the first-term lawmaker said.

Multiple requests for comment to the remaining 19 opposition members on the committee went unanswered on Tuesday, according to reports. That includes the top opposition member on the committee, who did not attend either of the panel’s scheduled depositions with the former officials in January.

Another member of the panel even waved off media during an attempt to ask about her thoughts on the contempt effort, claiming she was engaged in an “intense” conversation with a legislative aide.

The top opposition member had previously accused the oversight committee chairman of hypocrisy in trying to hold the former officials accountable while not pushing harder to enforce the subpoena aimed at forcing the justice ministry to release all of its files, which it has not yet done.

“I think it’s incredibly hypocritical for [the chairman] to go out and try to hold in contempt his political enemies while [the attorney general] is actively breaking the law, and he refuses to hold her in contempt,” the opposition lawmaker told local media last week.

But in his opening remarks ahead of the committee meeting, the chairman is expected to argue that it would be opposition lawmakers who are acting hypocritical if they do not vote to hold chamber-wide contempt votes, according to remarks obtained by media outlets.

“We’ve offered flexibility on scheduling. The response we received was not cooperation, but defiance, marked by repeated delays, excuses, and obstruction,” the chairman will reportedly say. “Today, the [former officials] must be held accountable for their actions. And [opposition lawmakers] must support these measures, or they will be exposed as hypocrites.”

Neither of the former officials have been implicated in any wrongdoing related to the corruption case, observers note.