Jewish World Review Feb. 13, 2002 / 2 Adar, 5762

Jules Witcover

Jules Witcover
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

Taking 'the Fifth'

http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com -- IF nothing else, former Enron boss Kenneth Lay and a number of his associates in the latest stock-market scandal have dusted off and brought back an old expression that to many Americans has become the functional equivalent of "I'm guilty."

That would be, of course, "taking the Fifth," as in the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, which holds in part that no person "shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself."

Not since the days of the colorful communist-hunting and congressional hearings of the late 1940s and 1950s and the crime and labor racketeering investigations of the 1950s has refusing to testify on grounds of the Fifth Amendment been so in vogue.

Enron bigwigs who until only months ago were perceived as shining examples of the American enterprise system are joining the fraternity of old mobsters and forgotten political lefties who won infamy by invoking their legal protection against getting the goods on themselves.

There is, however, a major and ironic difference between the Enron corporate geniuses of today and the alleged crooks, communists and fellow-travelers of half a century ago or more. While many citizens of that time castigated witnesses for "hiding behind the Fifth," a significant number of others defended them as upholders of civil liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. You don't hear that being said today of Lay and his associates.

The reason is that the hearings of the old House American Activities Committee and of the Red-hunting committee headed by the infamous Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy of Wisconsin were perceived by many as witch hunts. Many witnesses invoked the Fifth Amendment not only to protect themselves from possible criminal prosecution, but also to avoid having to finger friends and colleagues.

While the bulk of citizen observers may have accepted that "taking the Fifth" was, as McCarthy insisted, an admission of guilt, many others at the time saw a decency in its use by witnesses who believed their friends and colleagues were innocent of any wrongdoing. Also, the notion of being interrogated about one's political beliefs, let alone sent to jail for declining to answer, was abhorrent to many, and won some public support for those who refused.

McCarthy and other communist-chasers came to label anyone who used his constitutional protection against self-incrimination as a "Fifth Amendment communist." We haven't reached the stage yet where the alleged Enron culprits are being called "Fifth Amendment capitalists," but it's probably fair to suggest that those who have used and will be using the legal protection will likewise by assumed to be guilty in doing so. Lay, in invoking the Fifth, referred regretfully to this reality.

From a legal point of view, Lay can't be touched for invoking the Fifth, and a Georgetown law professor I've talked to says that considering what has already come out about the Enron case, if he was Lay's lawyer he would advise him to do just that. But, he adds, "if I was his clergyman I guess I'd advise him to do the moral thing and testify."

In this light, the decision of former Enron chief executive Jeffrey Skilling to give testimony rather than claiming the Fifth may have seemed more honorable, but it was legally risky. Already one congressional committee chairman has indicated that Skilling is flirting with a perjury rap.

The origins of the Fifth Amendment go back to England and hatred of the old star chamber proceedings, when confessions were wrung from subjects accused of unacceptable religious practices and other "crimes." The founding fathers wanted to make sure there was none of that here.

In the late 1940s and 1950s, however, the Red-hunting congressional committees themselves were highly controversial and often suspect of sinister and unfair methods. Today there isn't any quarrel about Congress investigating what happened in Enron, not yet at least.

That could change, though, if what is now talked about as a corporate scandal becomes a political one with Democrats using the hearings to lay it at the White House doorstep. Congressional hearings, now as then, often have a way of turning into partisan brawls.


Comment on JWR contributor Jules Witcover's column by clicking here.

02/11/02: Campaign finance reform showdown
02/08/02: Dems need a Truman
02/06/02: The Bush budget: Reality replaces poetry
02/04/02: Going after the Axis of Evil --- or not
02/01/02: Bush keeps Dems on ropes
01/30/02: White House task force secrecy
01/25/02: A politically poisonous congressional session
01/23/02: Whither AlGore?
01/21/02: In search of … Tom Ridge
01/18/02: Kennedy takes on the tax fight
01/16/02: On the departure of high government officials
01/11/02: The lobbyist as party chairman
01/07/02: Torricelli's clean bill of health
12/12/01: The elevated vice presidency
12/07/01: September 11th and December 7th
12/05/01: Another children's crusade
12/03/01: Stall on campaign finance reform
11/30/01: Stall on campaign finance reform
11/28/01: More Justice Department folly
11/26/01: Ashcroft still under fire
11/21/01: Normalcy vs. security at the White House
11/12/01: Bush's latest pep talk
11/07/01: The blame game on airport security
11/05/01: Bellwether gubernatorial elections?
11/02/01: Feingold's complaint
10/31/01: Putting the cart before the horse?
10/29/01: Show business on economic stimulus
10/26/01: No political business as usual
10/24/01: Senatorial bravado
10/22/01: Split decision on gun rights
10/16/01: New York mayor's race: What kind of experience?
10/15/01: New York: Making a comeback
10/11/01: Giuliani: Fly in the election ointment
10/08/01: One or two New Yorks?
10/05/01: Providing your own security
10/01/01: Getting back to 'normal'
09/28/01: Muzzling the Voice Of America
09/26/01: Bush's transformation
09/24/01: Using a tragedy for a federal bailout
09/21/01: A view of tragedy at home from abroad
09/14/01: Script for AlGore's coming-out party
08/31/01: Scandal and privacy in politics
08/24/01: On replacing Helms
08/22/01: Politics takes a summer holiday
08/15/01: The resurfacing of AlGore
08/13/01: You can go home again
08/10/01: Governors' Conference drought
08/08/01: Governors defend their turf
08/06/01: New Bush muscle with congress
08/03/01: America's benign neglect
07/30/01: Where is the fear factor?
07/26/01: Dubya, Nancy Reagan and the Pope
07/23/01: Bush's congressional dilemma
07/19/01: Katharine Graham, giant
07/11/01: Finessing election reform
07/09/01: Listening to, and watching, Ashcroft
07/06/01: New comedian in the House (of Representatives)
06/27/01: Spinning Campaign Finance Reform's latest 'headway'
06/25/01: When Dubya says 'the check is in the mail,' you can believe him
06/22/01: The push on patients' rights
06/20/01: If you can't trust historians, how can you trust history?
06/18/01: World Refugee Day
06/13/01: Remembering 'Hubert'
06/11/01: Ventura faces government shutdown
06/06/01: McCain doth protest too much
06/04/01: Memo to the Bush daughters
05/30/01: Missing in action: Democratic outrage
05/30/01: Honoring World War II vets
05/23/01: Lauding the Nixon pardon
05/21/01: Messin' with McCain
05/18/01: A great movie plot
05/16/01: The level of public sensibility these days
05/14/01: "I am Al Gore. I used to be the next president of the United States"

© 2001, TMS