Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout82-532 SprecherJeffrey K. Sprecher Criminal Court Administrator Court of Common Pleas Of Berks County 23rd Judicial District of PA Berks County Courthouse Reading, PA 19601 Dear Mr. Sprecher: Mailing Address: STATE ETHICS COMMISSION P.O. BOX 1179 HARRISBURG, PA 17108 TELEPHONE: (717) 783 -1610 April 2.0, 1982 ADV -ICE OF COUNSEL RE: Constables, Financial Interest Statements 82 -532 This responds to your letter of March 29, 1982 in which you request advice regarding the application of the Ethics Act to constables. Issue: You request advice as to whether constables are required to complete Statements of Financial Interest on a yearly basis. Facts: Constables may be in some instances appointed, but more commonly elected. The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania has prescribed a code of conduct for constables. Currently, the State Ethics Commission does not require incumbent judges (as incumbents or candidates) to submit Statements of Financial Interest. Discussion: The Ethics Act, 65 P.S. 401 et seq. defines public official as "any elected or appointed official in the executive, legislative or judicial branch of the state or any political subdivision." 65 P.S. 402. Thus, a constable would typically be subject to the Ethics Act and be required to file Financial Interest Statements pursuant to Section 4(a) and (b) of the Ethics Act unless other circumstances intervene. State Ethics Commission • 308 Finance Building • Harrisburg, Pennsylvania Jeffrey K. Sprecher April 20, 1982 Page 2 In the current situation other circumstances do intervene which indicate that, at present, incumbent constables, either appointed or elected, as in ^urnbents or candidates will not be required to file Financial Interest Statements pending the Supreme Court's disposition of its review in the Kremer v. State Ethics Commission case. The reason for this current, interim ruling, is as follows.. Basically, the Supreme Court in its decision in relation to Section 3(e) of the Ethics Act in Wajert v. State Ethics Commission, Pa. , 420 A.2d 439 (7930), indicated that the constitution of Pennsylvania gives the Supreme Court of the Commonwealth the exclusive power to promulgate regulations governing practice, procedure, and conduct of all officers of the Court system. Constables are included in the category of "all officers" who would serve, process or inforce orders, judgments or decrees of the Court. See Article 5 Section 10(c) of the Pennsylvania Constitution. In addition the Commonwealth'Court has ruled that Sections 4(d) and.5 of the Ethics Act may not consti- tutionally be applied to judges. See Kremer v.' State Ethics Commission, Pa. Cmwlth. , 424 A.2d 986 (1981). Given the precedents and given the fact that Supreme Court has prescribed a code 'of conduct for constable. they must be considered persons who serve, process issue by justices of the peace and enforcing their judgment it must be logically perceived that such persons as constables are thought to be essential officers of the Court. See Note 2 Rule 2, 13 P.S. Chapter 1 Appendix. Essentially, the Supreme Court's Code states that "a constable is an integral part of the judicial system." As an integral part of the judicial system, constables are to be regulated by the Supreme Court under Article 5, Section 10(c) of the Pennsyl- vania Constitution. Since the ability of the Legislature to promulgate the Ethics.Act and to apply that Act to members of the "judicial system" is in question under the previously cited rulings, the Ethics Commission will not at the present time require incumbent constables, elected or appointed, as incumbents or candidates to file Financial Interest State- ments. This ruling is only applicable pending the final determination of the Supreme Court in the Kremer case. This ruling is consistent with the policy adopted by the Commission in relation to judges in general. L Jeffrey K. Sprecher April _Q, 1982 Page 3 This ruling does not effect the requirement that non - incumbent candidates for the post of constable are, in the Commission's estimation, required to file Financial Interest Statement as candidates for that office. Conclusion: Pending the Supreme Court's determination in the Kremer case, the Ethics Commission, at its discretion, will apply the same policy to incumbent constables as members of the judicial system as it is currently applying to incumbent members of the judiciary itself. Thus, incumbents, constables, elected or appointed as incumbents or candidates for re- election or re appointment need not file Financial Interest Statements on an annual basis or otherwise. This determination is, as noted above, applicable only until the Supreme Court's final determination in the Kremer case. Pursuant to Section 7(9)(ii), this Advice is a complete defense in any enforcement proceeding initiated by the Commission, and evidence of good faith conduct in any other civil or criminal proceeding, providing the requestor has disclosed truthfully all the material facts and committed the acts complained of in reliance on the Advice given. This letter is a public record and will be made available as such. Finally, if you disagree with this Advice or if you have any reason to challenge same, you may request that the full Commission review this Advice. A personal appearance before the Commission may be scheduled and a formal Opinion from the Commission will be issued. You should make such a request or indicate your disapproval of this Advice within the next 30 days. SSC /rdp Sincerely, Sandra S. C istianson General Co•nsel d77