The former acting inspector general of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) altered and delayed investigations at the request of senior administration officials and “failed to uphold the independence” of his office, according to a Senate oversight report released Thursday.
Charles K. Edwards served as the acting inspector general of DHS from 2011 through 2013 and compromised his independent role by sharing drinks and dinner with department leaders and giving them inside information on the timing and findings of investigations. The scope of Edwards’ actions were detailed in a report by the Senate Homeland Security and Government Operations Subcommittee on Financial and Contracting Oversight. It began investigating Edwards in June 2013 after receiving several whistleblower allegations about him in his role of acting inspector general.
Edwards was asked to appear before the subcommittee at a hearing on December 19 to address some of the allegations, but he resigned from his position on December 16—the same day Jeh Johnson was confirmed as DHS secretary—and the hearing was cancelled. Instead, Edwards was transferred to DHS’s Office of Science and Technology, where he is currently employed, and John Roth was eventually made the new DHS inspector general in March 2013.
After the cancellation, the subcommittee continued its investigation of Edwards and released its findings Thursday morning. According to its report, the subcommittee found that Edwards “jeopardized the independence” of the DHS Office of Inspector General (OIG). The subcommittee based its findings on “Edwards’ inadequate understanding of the importance of OIG independence and his frequent communications and personal friendships with senior DHS officials.” |
Within the report, the subcommittee explained that Edwards “enjoyed an improperly close personal relationship” with DHS officials. He regularly communicated with the DHS chief of staff and the DHS acting counsel, offering updates on investigations and audits. Edwards also socialized with senior DHS officials outside of work over drinks and dinner. According to emails obtained by the subcommittee, Edwards told the DHS chief of staff that he valued their friendship and that his “support, guidance, and friendship has helped me be successful this year.”
Along with improper personal relationships, the subcommittee also found that Edwards did not obtain independent legal advice on DHS matters. Instead, he sought legal advice from the DHS Office of General Counsel instead of with the Counsel to the Inspector General, violating the law. Edwards also told the subcommittee during the investigation that “he did not have trust” in his own counsel in the OIG.
In addition to these findings, the subcommittee found that Edwards directed reports be altered or delayed to accommodate senior DHS officials and did not recuse himself from audits and inspections that had a conflict of interest related to his wife’s employment.
Along with the findings on Edwards’ conduct, the subcommittee also investigated allegations that Edwards “improperly concealed or destroyed records, improperly favored certain employees, and retaliated against those who brought attention to his misconduct.” The subcommittee did not find evidence to substantiate these allegations, but it did find that there was “widespread belief” that Edwards engaged in these actions. This belief “contributed to an office environment characterized by low morale, fear, and general dissatisfaction with Mr. Edwards’ leadership,” the report said.
www.securitymanagement.com
No comments:
Post a Comment