Justice Department supervisors take differing approaches in work assignments for attorneys who are accused of misconduct and the department has not carried out an internal directive aimed at reducing delays in implementing discipline and ensure consistent decisions about discipline, GAO has said.
Some supervisors assign work on a case-by-case basis but consider factors, such as the nature of the alleged misconduct, in doing so. However, others assign work to such attorneys no differently than to other attorneys until the supervisors determine allegations have merit or professional misconduct is confirmed.
The department has not implemented a 2011 memo from the Attorney General that would expand to all components the purview of the Professional Misconduct Review Unit, the unit that proposes and decides discipline for attorneys with findings of misconduct. Currently, that unit has jurisdiction over only U.S. Attorneys’ offices and the criminal division, it said.
Also, Justice “does not require its components to demonstrate that attorneys have served the discipline imposed on them for misconduct. Ensuring that discipline is implemented helps hold attorneys accountable for violating professional standards and provides the public reasonable assurance that misconduct is being addressed,” said GAO.
Justice agreed with GAO’s recommendation that it require components to demonstrate that they have implemented discipline for misconduct and establish near-term milestones for expanding PMRU’s jurisdiction to decide discipline for all attorneys with findings of misconduct.
The report is here: http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-156
