Lawyers Who Want to Be Excluded from Government Ethics Codes
Government lawyers enjoy exceptions to transparency laws. Should they
also be excepted from government ethics laws? Atlanta senior assistant
city attorney Robert N. Godfrey thinks so, according to <a href="http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-elections/board-puts-attorneys…
article in yesterday's Atlanta <i>Journal-Constitution</i></a>.<br>
<br>
Godfrey allowed lawyers suing the city to pick up two restaurant tabs
for him at meals they attended together. But he says that his ethics
are regulated only by the state bar and the state supreme court, not by
the city's ethics board. The ethics board disagreed and will consider
the complaint against him.<br>
<br>
The Georgia bar also does not appear to agree with Godfrey. "Only the
Georgia Supreme Court — and the Bar, with powers delegated by the court
— can regulate the practice of law. But lawyers still must comply with
state and local laws, said Paula Frederick, the Bar’s general counsel."<br>
<br>
The fact is that lawyer disciplinary rules lack many sorts of provision
that appear in government ethics codes. And where there is overlap,
government officials usually have stronger and more clear obligations
than lawyers. In addition, very few disciplinary rules recognize the
unique situation or obligations of government lawyers. For more on the
legal and ethical issues involved in government ethics jurisdiction
over government lawyers, see <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/node/686">my blog post</a> on this
topic.<br>
<br>
I believe that this is more about attorney arrogance than it is an
honest jurisdictional issue, but it keeps coming up. And in some cases,
government lawyers have successfully placed in ethics
codes provisions that exclude lawyers from having to follow the code.<br>
<br>
Georgia happens to be home to a truly arrogant example of a lawyer
insisting that a government ethics code does not apply to him.<br>
<br>
According to the <i>Journal-Constitution</i> article, "<a href="http://www.proctorhutchins.com/attorneys.html">Robert Proctor</a>
made much the same argument in 2004 when he was fined $1,000 for
failing to register as a lobbyist. Proctor should have done so, the
State Ethics Commission ruled, before testifying at a legislative
hearing on behalf of a client who buys and sells tax liens. Proctor
blew off ethics investigators at the time, explaining that 'he is only
regulated by the Supreme Court' and the Bar, records show."<br>
<br>
Here's an excerpt from the state EC's investigation, included in <a href="http://www.atlantaunfiltered.com/2010/02/15/dont-let-proctor-flip-rigid…
post on the Atlanta Unfiltered blog</a>:<br>
<ul>
I then asked if [Proctor] was aware of the definition of lobbyist under
[Georgia Code section] 21-5-70 — he stated that he didn’t “give a shit”
what it said because he was not regulated by the 21-5-70 he is only
regulated by the Supreme Court and the GA Association.<br>
</ul>
If that's not enough to convince you of the lawyer's arrogance, try
this:<br>
<ul>
Told that former Attorney General Mike Bowers had issued an
advisory opinion that lawyers must also register as lobbyists,
records show, Proctor said “it didn’t matter because the AG is just
another attorney.”<br>
</ul>
Not only has Proctor still
not paid the fine, but (and I'm not making this up) he was appointed to
the state ethics commission in January, and before he attended his
first meeting, his failure to pay his fine came out, and he resigned.
For more on this, see <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/ec-members-and-law-ethics-distinction…
recent City Ethics blog post</a>.<br>
<br>
If a government lawyer says an EC has no jurisdiction over him or her,
tell the story of Robert Proctor. Someone in Georgia ought to turn it
into a good country-western song to preserve it for future generations.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---