Case MaterialsCase NavigationHughes Case
Case Materials |
Protection for the Public and Private Sectors False Claims Reform Act of 1986 (Title 31 Money and Finance, §§ 3729 3733) In 1863, the False Claims Act was written to provide a civil penalty
"of double the amount of damages suffered by the government, plus
a $2,000 forfeiture for each false claim submitted." [9]. The law
was "enacted to prosecute Civil War manufacturers who substituted
sawdust for gunpowder in Union army supplies." [7]
Any person could submit a lawsuit on behalf of the government regarding
a false claim against the government. These people are referred to as
the qui tam. Qui tam comes from the Latin "qui tam
pro domino rege quam pro sic ipso in hoc parte sequitur,"
meaning "who as well for the king as for himself sues in this matter."
Black's Law Dictionary (1979) defines a qui tam action as "an action brought
by an informer, under a statute which establishes a penalty for the commission
or omission of a certain act, and provides that the same shall be recoverable
in a civil action, part of the penalty to go to any person who will bring
such action and the remainder to the state or some other institution."
[9] In other words,
the qui tam plaintiff is sues on behalf of his/her own right as
well as that of the government. Amendments in both 1943 and 1986 were enacted to "increase detection
and prosecution of false claims submitted to the federal government."
[8] The Reform
Act of 1986 was "the brain-child of public-interest attorney John
R. Phillips." [7]
If the Attorney General elects to take over the case, whistleblowers are
guaranteed 15 to 25 percent of funds recovered as well as legitimate compensation
for legal fees, back pay, and other damages. If the Attorney General does
not elect to take over the case, the whistleblowers are guaranteed 25
to 30 percent of the winnings. In general, a claim is defined in § 3729 (1986) as, "any request
or demand, whether under a contract or otherwise, for money or property
which is made to a contractor, grantee, or other recipient if the United
States Government provides any portion of the money or property which
is requested or demanded, or if the Government will reimburse such contractor,
grantee, or other recipient for any portion of the money or property which
is requested or demanded." The Act defines 7 acts that can be prosecuted as false claims. Individuals
can be prosecuted under the False Claims Reform Act of 1986 only if they
knowingly defraud the government with one of these false claims.
By "knowingly", the Act states that a person, with respect to
pertinent information about the false claim, "has actual knowledge
of the information, acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity
of the information, or acts in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity
of the information." This means that violators can be prosecuted
not on "clear and convincing evidence" which was required in
the 1863 Act but only on a "preponderance of evidence." An employee
does not need to prove that their employer submitte4d a false claim, just
have a "good-faith belief that a violation had been committed." False claims as defined by the 1986 Reform Act are as follows: "§ 3729 False Claims (a) Liability for Certain Acts Any person who The penalties for violations can be very costly. Violators can pay up
to $10,000 for each false claim as well as attorneys fees and other
costs. But, if the violator admits to submitting a false claim within
30 days of the Government discovering it, the fines are reduced to no
less than twice that suffered by the Government. All other damages are
waived. Most importantly, the 1986 revision includes a whistleblower protection
provision. (31 U.S.C. § 3730 (h)) "Any employee who is discharged,
demoted, suspended, threatened, harassed, or in any other manner discriminated
against in the terms and conditions of employment by his or her employer
because of lawful acts done by the employee on behalf of the employee
or others in furtherance of an action under this section, including investigation
for, initiation of, testimony for, or assistance in an action filed or
to be filed under this section, shall be entitled to all relief necessary
to make the employee whole." [4] Protection for Government Employees Whistleblower Protection Act of 1989 (Title 5 Government Organization and Employees, § 1201) In order to prevent retaliation against whistleblowers, the Civil Service
Reform Act of 1978 established the Office of Special Counsel. Since whistleblowers
"serve the public interest by assisting in the elimination of fraud,
waste, abuse and unnecessary Government expenditures," the Whistleblower
Protection Act of 1989 was written in order to strengthen this protection
for whistleblowers by the Office of Special Counsel. Congress found that
"protecting employees who disclose Government illegality, waste,
abuse, and corruption is a major step toward a more effective civil service."
The Act improves protection as follows: a) Protect employees who seek assistance b) Act in the interest of these employees; and c) While disciplining those who commit prohibited personnel practices,
remember that protection of employees who seek assistance remains
the paramount consideration." The Act provides deadlines to which the Office of Special Counsel must
adhere in prosecuting whistleblower complaints. "To help prevent
retaliation against whistleblowers while their cases are pending, the
Counsel is specifically prohibited from disclosing the identity of whistleblowers,
except when necessary to prevent imminent danger to the public or to prevent
criminal activity." [8]
To prevent delays after trial, whistleblowers who win their cases are
compensated for attorneys fees and other costs while appellate court
reviews are pending. [10] Protection for Employees of Defense Contractors Department of Defense Authorization Act of 1987 (Title 10 Armed Forces, § 2409) Much like the whistleblower protection clause in the 1986 False Claims
Reform Act, the Department of Defense Authorization Act of 1987 was written
specifically to prohibit retaliation against whistleblowers. But, this
Act was written specifically for employees of defense contractors who
disclose "substantial violations of the law." Under this Act, "an employee of a contractor may not be discharged,
demoted, or otherwise discriminated against as a reprisal for disclosing
to a Member of congress or an authorized official of an agency or the
Department of Justice information relating to a substantial violation
of law related to a contract." The maximum penalty for violation is complete compensation for damages
to the employee. This can included rehiring, back pay, employment benefits,
attorneys fees, or other fees that were lost or otherwise reasonably
incurred by the whistleblower throughout the course of "bringing
the complaint regarding the reprisal [to the] head of the agency."
[11] |
||||
|