Inspector general plan faces scrutiny
Fasano questions constitutionality of position in police bill
HARTFORD — The Senate Republican leader and the chief state’s attorney are questioning the constitutionality of a new inspector general position in the controversial police accountability bill being debated by the state legislature.
Senator Len Fasano of North Haven has asked state Attorney General William Tong for an official legal opinion before the Senate votes Tuesday on the bill. Lawmakers have pushed strongly for an inspector general who would have subpoena powers to investigate and prosecute police shootings and other cases of police use of force and misconduct.
But Fasano and Chief State’s Attorney Richard J. Colangelo said separately that the Connecticut constitution requires that all prosecutions must be handled through the chief state’s attorney and the regional prosecutors around the state. The current bill calls for an independent office within the criminal justice division that must be physically separate from any prosecutor’s office.
Fasano noted that Republicans have pushed for the position, but he said that the drafting of the complex bill had problems.
“I understand the proponents of this bill had the best intentions in developing this section,‘’ Fasano said. “However, the language ultimately included in the bill related to the creation of the inspector general was rushed and contains elements that conflict with the state Constitution.‘’
He added, “This is what happens when legislation is rushed and written to garner votes, not to be sound policy. These unconstitutional elements could put provisions of the bill at risk for legal challenges and being invali
dated. … The unconstitutionality of one section has the potential to call provisions of the bill into question in the future.”
Tong’s office declined to comment Saturday on the merits of the issue. Elizabeth Benton, a spokeswoman, said, “We received Senator Fasano’s request and will respond accordingly.”
Two top Democrats, House Speaker Joe Aresimowicz of Berlin and judiciary committee co-chairman Steve Stafstrom of Bridgeport, said Saturday that Fasano is playing politics.
“The provision Sen. Fasano is questioning was written on a bipartisan basis by Republican and Democratic leaders of the Judiciary Committee with everyone reviewing each draft every step of the way,‘’ the Democrats said. “Everyone worked dozens of hours together over many weeks to draft a historic bill which was then scrutinized throughout a 12-hour hearing. Attorney general opinions are always helpful, but let’s be clear that Sen. Fasano is essentially questioning the diligence of his own Republican committee leaders while at the same time attempting to inject partisan politics on the eve on an historic vote in the Senate.‘’
Colangelo, the state’s top prosecutor, strongly supports the “great idea” of an inspector general but also has some of the same concerns as Fasano.
“Having it under the division of criminal justice for administrative purposes only is probably a constitutional issue,‘’ Colangelo told the Courant. “The constitution says the powers to prosecute cases are vested in the chief state’s attorney and the state’s attorney for each judicial district.‘’
The measure is headed to the Senate after an all-day and allnight marathon at the state Capitol that concluded Friday morning with an 86-58 vote by the House of Representatives. The debate also included a dramatic 72-72 tie on a Republican amendment to preserve the concept of “qualified immunity” so that officers could not be sued for personal damages in civil lawsuits. The tie vote means that the amendment failed — dealing a blow to police chiefs and rank-and-file officers who lobbied to keep immunity.
“The Connecticut House approved a historic police accountability measure on Friday which will shine more light on our law enforcement through an Inspector General and civilian review boards, mandate the use of dashboard and body cameras for all officers, and end the pipeline of military equipment to local police departments,” said Max Reiss, chief spokesman for Gov. Ned Lamont. “This proposal moves our state forward in significant ways, and the Governor is urging the Senate to pass this measure next week and send it to his desk for his signature.”
Colangelo said another problem is that the bill calls for only four employees in the inspector general’s office when he contends that the unit needs 11 employees, including two veteran prosecutors, six inspectors, a paralegal, and a forensic analyst. The unit would have investigated at least 19 cases in 2018 and 24 cases in 2019, including fatal police shootings, non-fatal uses of police force and other deaths in police custody. Four employees, Colangelo said, could not handle the workload for a large number of sensitive cases.
Proponents said the overall bill represents groundbreaking legislation that would ban choke holds, require body cameras for all officers for the first time, increase training in handling encounters with minority groups, require officers to display their name tag prominently on their outermost uniform, and ensure that local departments evaluate whether bringing social workers on certain calls will help their response. The measure calls for officers to be drug-tested for controlled substances and anabolic steroids in order to maintain their certification.
The detailed bill also prevents the state police from having union contracts that prevent the disclosure of various personnel files under the state Freedom of Information Act. If passed by the Senate, the information would now be subject to FOI, thus overturning the provision in the current state police contract, lawmakers said. Republicans, though, were concerned that the FOI provision would not apply to local police or corrections officers.
In response to the death of George Floyd in police custody in Minneapolis that was witnessed in close proximity by three other officers, the bill also states that police and correction officers who witness excessive or illegal force “shall intervene and attempt to stop” the use of force.
The lobbying on the bill is continuing in advance of the vote in the state Senate. On Monday, legislators who voted against the bill in the House and police and local officials are planning to gather on the steps of the Fairfield Police Department.
“While police officials generally do not speak about legislative matters, given the sudden and rushed nature of this legislation we feel the need to express our concerns regarding this bill,” said Chief Christopher Lyddy. “We ask that community members consider joining us on Monday in a show of solidarity.‘’
The inspector general would be involved in the prosecutions of police officers in a bill that called for more transparency and accountability. Part of the accountability, legislators said, was the most controversial portion of the bill that centered on qualified immunity.
Rep. Antonio Felipe, a Bridgeport Democrat from the 130th district, said on the House floor after 4:30 a.m. Friday that qualified immunity is “an absolute shield for law enforcement that should not exist.‘’
Rep. Anthony Nolan, a New London Democrat who is a member of the legislature’s Black and Puerto Rican Caucus, told his colleagues that he was no longer angry and is now seeking fairness.
“I’m not saying all police are bad,‘’ Nolan said. “But we have police who do wrong, and we need to hold them accountable.‘’