Court Rejects Legislative Push for Independent Oversight of File Release

A federal judge reportedly ruled Wednesday that he lacks jurisdiction to appoint an outside expert to ensure the Justice Ministry complies with legislation requiring the release of files related to the prosecution of deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein, according to court documents.

The seven-page ruling by the district judge halts an effort by two lawmakers from opposing political factions to participate in the case involving Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell. The legislators had sought to participate as “friends of the court” in an effort to have the judge appoint a special master to oversee file releases under what officials call the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Observers note that the lawmakers - one from the liberal faction representing a western coastal region and another from the conservative faction representing a southern state - allegedly believe that without oversight, the Justice Ministry will not produce all required files under the transparency legislation.

The judge reportedly stated he cannot grant the legislators’ request because they are not parties to the case that led to Maxwell’s conviction in late 2021 on sex trafficking charges. Maxwell was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment for recruiting girls for the deceased financier, according to court records.

“The only parties to the case are Maxwell and the nation, the latter represented, as is always the case, by [the Justice Ministry],” the judge wrote, as reported by legal analysts. “The charges against Maxwell were brought under six federal criminal statutes. Those were not brought under the [transparency act], which did not exist at the time and is not a criminal statute.”

The Justice Ministry has not immediately responded to requests for comment, sources indicate.

One of the lawmakers said in a statement that the pair “remain determined to force the [Justice Ministry] to follow our law using other avenues available to us and the survivors.” His colleague from the opposing faction reportedly stated they would continue efforts to force the government to release all files related to the case.

“We appreciate the judge’s timely response and attention to our request, and we respect his decision,” the lawmaker allegedly said. “He said that we raised ‘legitimate concerns’ about whether [the Justice Ministry] is complying with the law.”

The two legislators spearheaded the transparency legislation, which was signed into law by the head of state last year. The law required the Justice Ministry to release all evidence gathered during decades of investigations by mid-December, according to government sources.

However, weeks after the deadline, reportedly only a fraction of the files have been released, prompting criticism from officials across the political spectrum. The Justice Ministry has said the files’ release was slowed by redactions required to protect the identities of abuse victims, officials note.

In their correspondence to the court, the lawmakers wrote that the ministry’s release of only 12,000 documents out of more than 2 million documents under review represented what they called a “flagrant violation” of the law’s requirements.

“Put simply, the [Justice Ministry] cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act,” they reportedly stated.

The judge acknowledged that the lawmakers raised “legitimate concerns,” but indicated his authority was limited in the matter. “The appointment of a neutral to supervise [the ministry’s] compliance with the [transparency act] is far afield from any matter pending before the Court,” he wrote, according to the ruling.

The case reflects ongoing tensions between the legislative and executive branches over government transparency, a common challenge in nations with divided power structures, observers suggest.