The Iraqi suspect in one case was at the center of a bid-rigging scandal tied to more than $750,000 in contracts to supply tents in the country’s Anbar province, according to newly released records.
But after investigators obtained a confession, the suspect “was released due to an Iraqi amnesty program for those committing non-violent offenses prior to February 27, 2008,” according to a 2008 case memo by the office of inspector general for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), an independent federal agency that doles out foreign aid.
In the second case, also in 2008, the inspector general for USAID spent about 18 months looking into accusations from a confidential source that a procurement officer for a USAID contractor received kickbacks for awarding subcontracts to two foreign-owned companies.
Though investigators uncovered evidence that an Iraqi national had fabricated invoices on the U.S.-taxpayer-funded contract for more than $25,000, the suspect wasn’t arrested.
“Based on the nature of the offense involved in this investigation and consultation with Iraqi judicial and law enforcement authorities, the suspect … falls under the General Amnesty Law,” the USAID inspector general concluded in a case memo.
Dona Dinkler, a spokeswoman for the inspector general’s office, said Tuesday that it’s not a typical outcome for investigations. After an inquiry from The Times last week, she said, officials reviewed their investigative files and “these are the only two cases we could uncover” in which suspects were able to avoid any criminal sanctions because of the Iraqi amnesty law.
“It’s costly to do these kinds of investigations,” Ms. Paige said. “The agents devote time and resources and at the end of the paper trail, it ends up the person is going to get a pass. It’s a waste of money for the investigators and auditors to spin their wheels to track this money in these cases.”
In documents provided to The Times, names and other identifying information about the suspects were redacted. In a letter accompanying the release of records, the inspector general’s office cited privacy reasons for withholding the names.
The letter stated that “individuals have a privacy interest in not being identified … and we believe that this interest outweighs any public interest in knowing their identities in this situation.”
Officials at the Iraqi Embassy in Washington did not respond to e-mail questions about the amnesty law. A May 2009 article in the Jurist, a legal publication, described the amnesty law as part of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s attempt to draw disaffected Sunnis into the national reconciliation and reconstruction process.
But the law has come under scrutiny as corruption remains a top area of concern in Iraq.
In its most recent quarterly report to Congress, the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction cited “the cancer of corruption” as one of the key challenges facing the Iraqi government as the U.S. winds down combat missions.View Entire Story
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
Jim McElhatton is an investigative reporter for The Washington Times. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
By John Solomon
How the government's punishing of the exposure of official wrongdoing can linger for years
Independent voices from the TWT Communities
Wall Street news before (and occasionally after) the opening bell.
Politics, economics, and business from a real world perspective.
Movie reviews, interviews, including the latest on DVR and Blu-Ray.
A mother of three and a passionate conservative, Shirley Husar changes the game.
Benghazi: The anatomy of a scandal
Vietnam Memorial adds four names
Cinco de Mayo on the Mall
NRA kicks off annual convention