Under fire: Blagojevich shuns trial, opens PR blitz

The Illinois Senate has largely modeled its rules after the impeachment trial of President Clinton in 1999.

“What guides fair procedures in an impeachment is not the kind of due process concerns that govern a civil or criminal trial,” says Mark Rosen, a professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law in Chicago. Rather, what is important is the public “perception that they’re structuring it in such a way that they’re not going to enfeeble the office of governor” by making it easy for him to be impeached, he says.

Blagojevich has complained that he is unable to call witnesses or introduce evidence in his defense, and that the articles of impeachment drafted by the Illinois House have been automatically admitted as evidence, without his being able to challenge them.

In fact, the rules do allow Blagojevich to challenge the articles and to request that the Senate subpoena witnesses, but he missed the deadlines for both requests, says Rikeesha Phelon, a spokeswoman for John Cullerton, Senate president.

“There has been fair opportunity,” Ms. Phelon says. “Unfortunately, rather than participate, he chose to complain after the deadlines.”

The state Senate is also cooperating with the US attorney’s office by deeming off limits a number of witnesses who might affect the criminal case against Blagojevich. Still, some of the impeachable offenses cited by the House are separate from the criminal complaint against Blagojevich. On Friday, a judge ruled that four FBI tapes of the governor’s conversations can be released to the legislature for use in the impeachment trial.

Public must see trial as fair

At this point, Phelon says, the proceedings will go ahead with or without Blagojevich’s participation, though they may last less than the two weeks originally allotted if no defense is presented.

Although the Senate is permitted to set its own rules for the trial, the proceedings still must be perceived as fair, say many observers, so that the office of governor isn’t weakened by a dangerous precedent. In that sense, the lawmakers have been thrown a bit of a curveball by the governor’s apparent refusal to participate.

“If that [refusal] persists, it’s a source of considerable disappointment and concern,” says Dawn Clark Netsch, a former Illinois comptroller, candidate for governor in 1994, and currently a law school professor at Northwestern University.

“Assuming he’s convicted, we want to be able to look back and say it was fair,” Professor Netsch says. “If I were in [the senators’] position, I would be looking to see if there are any options that would allow a case to be made” in his defense.

In the end, Netsch adds, the purpose of this impeachment is to remove from office someone who seems to have abused his power to the extent that he should no longer serve. “Put in those terms, I’m quite comfortable with it,” she says. “It’s not a criminal trial. He doesn’t go to prison. He doesn’t pay a fine.”

Previous

1 | 2