Impeachment

History

It is significant that the procedure of impeachment was imported Great Britain, where it is still used today, on rare occasions.

Impeachment appears in XIVe century.

The principle of the English mode is that the king cannot badly make . This protection extends to the agents from the Crown. It was thus impossible at the time to carry a charge against the Crown in a court of the king (ordinary court of justice).

Impeachment was then conceived like a skirting of this rule: one could parliament deposit a petition in front of the king in (political training of the Curia governed). When an agent of the king caused wrong to the subjects, while at the same time he exerted his powers in the name of the king, the king will be able to judge his minister. Little by little, the idea appears that one can criticize the policy even of the king, through a fictitious charge of responsibility: it was presupposed whereas the agent of the king had badly advised the king when this one had made its decision.

Impeachment was put in day before by the dynasty of the Tudor (absolutism).

When Jacques Ier of England wanted to found the absolute monarchy in 1621, Edward Coke, the chief of the parliamentary opposition, redécouvrit procedure of empeachment, but by perverting it. Whereas in the king in parliament , the king judges his minister, Coke calls upon the risk which the king either judge and party with the lawsuit. As from the moment when Jacques Ier agrees not to govern the judgment, the parliamentary opposition could systematize the attacks against him and its policy through its ministers, without the king not having any power to control nor cannot defend himself.

The use of impeachment became a weapon of war which changed in the long run the distribution of the political power between the Parliament and the king. Initially a mode of moderated monarchy, the mode changed with the wire of the revolutions into parliamentary mode with the appearance of the political responsibility of the government before the Parliament (in 1782, the members of Parliament obtain the collective resignation of the government directed by Lord North), which led the king in the long term to be erased as from the time victorienne (1824-1834). Moreover, it was impeachment against the principal Stradford minister who caused the revolution of 1641.

The systematic harassing of the cabinet (between 1670-1680) also will involve the creation of a permanent opposition within the Parliament, in favor of the policy of the king and voter against impeachment carried against the ministers of this last by the opponents with the king: it is the appearance of the political parties. Thus, to protect itself from these systematized attacks, the king will buy a group of permanent support so that they approve the government. Whereas at the beginning, there was about thirty corrupted under Charles Ier (Damby ministry), corruption spreads between 1721 and 1742: a third of the rooms, as well as the voters, is corrupted under the principal minister Lord High Treasurer Walpole. This the last, under criticisms of opposition Bolingbroke which supported a strict separation of the capacities and a Presidential regime (theory which was taken again by the United States), the theory of a flexible separation of the capacities developed, where it is normal that the king and his government receive the support of the parliamentary .

Procedure in the United States

The Ier article of the federal Constitution of the United States, treating Congress, which fixes the procedure. Impeachment strictly speaking, i.e. the committal for trial, is voted by the Chambre of the representatives. One can compare it to the procedure of inculpation by a large jury, which in common right, comes to a conclusion about the existence of serious charges justifying a lawsuit, and not on the culpability. The constitution does not prescribe the detail of the procedure in front of the Room of the representatives. The committal for trial is voted there like an ordinary law, in the majority simple. It does not have an other consequence only to open the lawsuit in front of the Senate.

The defendant can be a very senior official of the government, which include in particular the president and his vice-president, the members of the cabinet, equivalent of the ministers, and the federal judges. The defendant preserves his functions.

The lawsuit itself, which must come to a conclusion about the culpability of the defendant, is held in front of the Sénat of the United States. The constitution is then more precise: the senators must lend oath before sitting, and the decision of culpability can be acquired only in the majority of two thirds (either today sixty-seven of the hundred senators). In front of the Senate, is held a contradictory lawsuit near to the ordinary penal procedure, the defendant is represented by one or more lawyers, and all the constitutional guarantees of the rights of defense apply, except for the delivery of the culpability unanimously of a jury of twelve people, replaced by the vote of two thirds of the senators. When it is the president of the United States who is judged, the president of the Supreme court chairs the debates. If not, the Senate is chaired like usually by the Vice president of the United States or in its absence by the president pro in time of the Senate, elected among the senators. All the infringements, except most minor can lead to this procedure, since the constitution specifies in its article II, that which deals with the president, precise that it will be relieved if it is shown and convinced of:

Treason: the constitution gives a narrow definition of it;
Corruption;
very other Crime ( high crime ) and Offense ( misdemeanor ). The classification of the infringements is much more dubious in the United States than in France.

The Senate, if he votes the culpability, can only relieve the defendant and prohibit to him to occupy any official station in the future. Then, the defendant is liable to continuations for the same facts in front of the ordinary civil courts, with the procedure normal and prone to the sorrows normally envisaged by the law.

The President of the United States has constitutionally a right of reprieve ( power to forgiveness ) very wide, which is connected more with an amnesty. This right does not apply to the cases of impeachment.

Impeachment is intended to blame the individual criminal responsibility of the holder of a governmental seat, and not a political responsibility. He is not comparable to a motion of censure, incompatible with the Presidential regime and the American design of the Séparation of the capacities. The Congress is however brought to appreciate the political appropriateness of the continuations and the judgment, and it is often it which decides as well the opening of the procedure as verdict. It is allowed that the members of Parliament do not have the obligation, even moral, to put in charge nor to condemn that which they would consider guilty, that of as much less than the person will be in any event liable to continuation at the conclusion of its mandate. A contrario , although no authority has the capacity to be opposed to the procedure impeachment, the members of Parliament was however never discredited by carrying out the procedure without there being a reasonable probability that facts legally reprehensible were made.

Practice of impeachment

Historically, the room of the representatives voted the committal for trial only seventeen times, on a little more than sixty launched procedures. The Senate voted the culpability only seven times, always for federal judges, the first time in 1803. Twice, the room of the representatives voted the committal for trial of the president of the United States, for Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Both were discharged by the Senate. The room had begun work aiming at putting in charge Richard Nixon. The procedure was abandoned after its resignation, the only one of a president of the United States.

Andrew Johnson

The first procedure of impeachment was committed against the president Andrew Johnson in 1868.

Johnson, a democrat of Tennessee which had refused the secession, was elected as vice-president at the side of Abraham Lincoln for its second mandate. Become president after the assassination of Lincoln, it is in permanent conflict with the radical fringe of the Republican party, which dominates the Congress. The republicans want to implement an ambitious program in favor of the former slaves, and to punish as much as possible the overcome confederated States. The president wishes the appeasing, who passes by the abandonment of the program of the civic rights, and the rehabilitation of the States of the South in the political life. The congress votes the Tenure off Office Act (law on the maintenance in function) which removes with the president his traditional capacity to revoke freely the holders of the high positions of the executive, in particular minister and generals. The procedure is launched when Johnson passes in addition to. The committal for trial is voted with a vast majority by the Room of the Representatives. Only one vote missed with the Senate to vote the dismissal of Andrew Johnson. The Tenure off Office Act was declared unconstitutional in 1926 by the Supreme court, in its stop Myers v. United States (Myers against the United States).

Richard Nixon

The second procedure of impeachment was committed against the president Richard Nixon in 1974.

After the Scandal of Watergate, the commission of the legal affairs of the Room of the representatives ( House Judiciary Committee ) proposed with the Room, the July 27th, to vote on three counts of indictment:

obstruction with justice
abuse of power
insult with the Congress, for the refusal to forward the documents claimed by the board of inquiry. The term “insult” ( contempt ) is that which is employed for the refusal to obey the orders of a court.

It did not have of them time, Richard Nixon preferred to resign the August 8th 1974. It was pardoned by its successor and former vice-president, Gerald Ford. The grace cannot put an end to the procedure impeachment, but the Congress chooses not to take action pursuant to it.

Bill Clinton

The third procedure of impeachment was committed against the president Bill Clinton the October 8th 1998.

The submission of the report of the independent Prosecutor Kenneth Starr, with the Room of the representatives of the United States, the September 9th 1998, started what one calls the business of the Monicagate. This report/ratio shows the president of perjury, of obstruction to justice, subornation of witnesses and abuse of power.

The committal for trial of the president is voted the December 19th. Two criminal charges are retained:

perjury in front of the large jury for the business Lewinsky
obstruction with justice

The lawsuit is then open in front of the Senate, under the presidency of Chief Justice William Rehnquist, as envisaged by the constitution in the event of lawsuit of the president

The president is discharged by 55 senators out of 100 of the charge of perjury and by 50 of that of obstruction to justice, a majority of 67 votes being necessary to condemn Bill Clinton.

He was however continued at the conclusion of his mandate. The business quickly showed a transaction between Clinton and the prosecutor condemning the former president to 25000 $ of fine and the suspension of its authorization to be pled as a lawyer in the Arkansas for five years.

See too

Simple: Impeachment

Random links: