Who can prosecute fraud within the Government?

Question

Out of curiousity, who would be able to prosecute the Government officials for commiting fraud? Would these people be employed by the Government?

I am on Yahoo UK & Ireland. Why is everybody aswering as if there is Fraud in the US Government?

Answer 1

The House of Commons has a powerful committee called the Public Accounts Committee, traditionally Chaired by an opposition MP (currently Edward Leigh) which looks into issues concerning the efficient management of public money, including if necessary its fraudulent abuse. The National Audit Ofice, headed by the Comptroller and Auditor General, produces reports for this committee. The NAO is thus employed by the House of Commons (specifically, the House of Lords is not responsible for taxation), not the Government.

Government Departments have accounting officers, such as the Permanent Secretary, who are answerably for any financial irregularities. The Westminster machine does not trust ministers actually to handle money! Major Departments, like other large organisations, have internal audit functions to oversee their finances. In an organisation as large as Government, there is always going to be a certain amount of attempted low level fraud and it is probably the internal auditor who will find it out.

Once fraud has been identified, in the civil departments as far as I know the case will be handed over to the prosecuting authorities in the same way as any other crime. Usually this is the police for investigation followed by the Crown Prosecution Service to decide whether to prosecute. In some cases it will be the Customs and Exercise or Inland Revenue (which have now been combined but I forget their new title). These are employed by the Government but act independently in individual cases. If the fraud were in the armed services, it would be a court martial offence: each of the services has a separate prosecuting branch.

If fraud is to be punished, it has first to be reported to the prosecuting authorities. If you are thinking that this may not happen because it is against the interests of those in control, this is actually a bigger problem in the private sector. Reports of financial irregularity are bad for a firm's business image and a company may well just prefer to sack (or move within the organisation) those concerned quietly.

The major concern for taxpayers and voters at present should be financial mismanagement rather than outright fraud. In particular, the National Audit Office, and in turn the Public Accounts Committee has repeatedly reported to the Commons concerning the mismanagement of Information Technology contracts, but these problems have not been adequately addressed.

I pointed out that designated senior civil servants are responsible for the financial management of their Departments. How many major Government projects in recent years have hugely overspent and how many top civil servants have been sacked?

Answer 2

Its all about the special prosecutor. Remember when Clinton was impeached? Congress asked the Attorney General to appoint a special prosecutor (Ken Starr). The special prosecutor is not connected to any branch of the government, and therefore is considered neutral. Their pay is approved by Congress and goes through the AG's office.

Answer 3

it particularly is a terrible act of evil that doesn't basically injury the guy however the new child and nuclear family members to boot, fascinated by the objective of protecting the single and in elementary terms perpetrator. some human beings have a situation with necessary DNA testing with each and every stay delivery using fact they are in touch approximately privateness themes. in spite of the shown fact that, i've got self belief that at a minimum there could a minimum of be necessary DNA testing until now the court docket platforms mandates a circulate of wealth from the purported to the accuser. it somewhat is yet certainly one of the clarification why it somewhat is basically no longer secure for adult men to get married or perhaps stay with a woman. definite it somewhat is actual that maximum females are not like this yet once you think approximately that the courts assume paternity devoid of information basically for the reason which you have been married or using fact she suggested so, then it is going to become clean basically how extreme the stakes are. it somewhat is unlucky using fact there are countless sturdy females available that have the comparable cloud of suspicion solid over them using fact if a guy chooses the incorrect lady then the implications for him are so extreme regarding imprisonment, seizing of aspects and pay, suspension of license, humiliation of being categorised a ineffective beat dad and lots extra in elementary terms for being harmless jointly as the females that commit those crimes against humanity bear no punishment for his or her strikes in any admire. i've got self belief that paternity fraud, regardless of climate it became a marriage, residing together or one night stand, could be prosecuted as a criminal basically like identification theft.

Answer 4

I know there's a whistle blower statute that enables it to be prosecuted and I've seen a commercial on TV for a law firm that handles these cases. I think you're supposed to get a piece of the money recovered or something like that as an incentive.

Answer 5

If you mean the U.S. Government, that would be the U.S. Attorney General's office currently held by Alberto Gonzales.

A special prosecutor is assigned only in cases where there is a potential conflict of interest.

Answer 6

The government is such a huge organisation that it works like many different companies, all of whom check up on each other. It's like saying who would arrest a policeman for murder- it's all handled by different departments.

Answer 7

The Attorney General (Federal)

The Lt. Governor (States)

Answer 8

It is in our very old & to be updated Conistution.
We cant catch the fraud becouse they are in the governament.
They do all frauds to escape from fraud.

Answer 9

Only the fall guys who are dispensible
Probably not the big wigs

Answer 10

the attorney general.