Congressional Oversight Manual

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Congressional Oversight Manual Congressional Oversight Manual Frederick M. Kaiser Specialist in American National Government Walter J. Oleszek Senior Specialist in American National Government Todd B. Tatelman Legislative Attorney June 10, 2011 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL30240 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Congressional Oversight Manual Summary The Congressional Research Service (CRS) developed the Congressional Oversight Manual over 30 years ago, following a three-day December 1978 Workshop on Congressional Oversight and Investigations. The workshop was organized by a group of House and Senate committee aides from both parties and CRS at the request of the bipartisan House leadership. The Manual was produced by CRS with the assistance of a number of House committee staffers. In subsequent years, CRS has sponsored and conducted various oversight seminars for House and Senate staff and updated the Manual as circumstances warranted. The last revision occurred in 2007. Worth noting is the bipartisan recommendation of the House members of the 1993 Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress (Rept. No. 103-413, Vol. I): [A]s a way to further enhance the oversight work of Congress, the Joint Committee would encourage the Congressional Research Service to conduct on a regular basis, as it has done in the past, oversight seminars for Members and congressional staff and to update on a regular basis its Congressional Oversight Manual. Over the years, CRS has assisted many members, committees, party leaders, and staff aides in the performance of the oversight function, that is, the review, monitoring, and supervision of the implementation of public policy. Understandably, given the size, reach, cost, and continuing growth of the modern executive establishment, Congress’s oversight role is even more significant—and more demanding—than when Woodrow Wilson wrote in his classic Congressional Government (1885): “Quite as important as lawmaking is vigilant oversight of administration.” Today’s lawmakers and congressional aides, as well as commentators and scholars, recognize that Congress’s work, ideally, should not end when it passes legislation. Oversight is an integral way to make sure that the laws work and are being administered in an effective, efficient, and economical manner. In light of this destination, oversight can be viewed as one of Congress’s principal responsibilities as it grapples with the complexities of the 21st century. Congressional Research Service Congressional Oversight Manual Contents Purposes, Authority, and Participants...........................................................................................1 Purposes ...............................................................................................................................1 Ensure Executive Compliance with Legislative Intent .....................................................1 Improve the Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Economy of Governmental Operations ..........1 Evaluate Program Performance .......................................................................................2 Prevent Executive Encroachment on Legislative Prerogatives and Powers.......................2 Investigate Alleged Instances of Poor Administration, Arbitrary and Capricious Behavior, Abuse, Waste, Dishonesty, and Fraud............................................................2 Assess Agency or Officials’ Ability to Manage and Carry out Program Objectives...........2 Review and Determine Federal Financial Priorities .........................................................2 Ensure That Executive Policies Reflect the Public Interest...............................................3 Protect Individual Rights and Liberties............................................................................3 Other Specific Purposes ..................................................................................................3 Authority to Conduct Oversight ............................................................................................4 United States Constitution...............................................................................................4 Principal Statutory Authority...........................................................................................5 Responsibilities in House and Senate Rules...................................................................10 Congressional Participants in Oversight ..............................................................................13 Members and Committees.............................................................................................13 Staff of Member Offices and Committees......................................................................14 Congressional Support Agencies and Offices.................................................................15 Oversight Coordination and Processes.......................................................................................15 Oversight Coordination.......................................................................................................16 General Techniques of Ensuring Oversight Coordination Include ..................................16 Specific Means of Ensuring Oversight Coordination Include .........................................16 Oversight Processes ............................................................................................................16 The Budget Process.......................................................................................................16 The Authorization Process.............................................................................................17 The Appropriations Process...........................................................................................18 The Investigatory Process .............................................................................................19 The Confirmation Process .............................................................................................20 The Impeachment Process.............................................................................................22 Investigative Oversight .............................................................................................................23 Constitutional Authority to Perform Oversight and Investigative Inquiries...........................24 Authority of Congressional Committees..............................................................................24 Committee Jurisdiction .................................................................................................24 Legislative Purpose.......................................................................................................25 Legal Tools Available for Oversight and Investigations........................................................28 Subpoena Power ...........................................................................................................28 Deposition Authority.....................................................................................................29 Hearings .......................................................................................................................30 Congressional Immunity ...............................................................................................32 Enforcement of Congressional Authority.............................................................................33 Contempt of Congress...................................................................................................33 Perjury and False Statement Prosecutions......................................................................35 Limitations on Congressional Authority ..............................................................................35 Congressional Research Service Congressional Oversight Manual Constitutional Limitations.............................................................................................35 Common Law Privileges...............................................................................................42 Executive Privilege (“Presidential Communications Privilege”) ....................................46 Other Limitations..........................................................................................................51 Frequently Encountered Information Access Issues .............................................................54 Applicability of the Privacy Act ....................................................................................54 Applicability of the Freedom of Information Act ...........................................................56 Access to Grand Jury Materials.....................................................................................57 Access to Litigation Files in Pending Cases...................................................................60 Access to Classified Material ........................................................................................62 Access to Sensitive But Unclassified Materials (SBU, SSI, FOUO, etc).........................65 Statutory Limitations on Congressional Access to Information ......................................67 Individual Member and Minority Party Authority to Conduct Oversight and Investigations...................................................................................................................69 Specialized Investigations ...................................................................................................73
Recommended publications
  • One Hundred Fifteenth Congress of the United States of America
    H. Con. Res. 113 Agreed to June 5, 2018 One Hundred Fifteenth Congress of the United States of America AT THE SECOND SESSION Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen Concurrent Resolution Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concur- ring), SECTION 1. USE OF CAPITOL GROUNDS FOR SOAP BOX DERBY RACES. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Greater Washington Soap Box Derby Association (in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘sponsor’’) shall be permitted to sponsor a public event, soap box derby races (in this resolution referred to as the ‘‘event’’), on the Capitol Grounds. (b) DATE OF EVENT.—The event shall be held on June 16, 2018, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House of Rep- resentatives and the Committee on Rules and Administration of the Senate jointly designate. SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS. (a) IN GENERAL.—Under conditions to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and the Capitol Police Board, the event shall be— (1) free of admission charge and open to the public; and (2) arranged not to interfere with the needs of Congress. (b) EXPENSES AND LIABILITIES.—The sponsor shall assume full responsibility for all expenses and liabilities incident to all activities associated with the event. SEC. 3. EVENT PREPARATIONS. Subject to the approval of the Architect of the Capitol, the sponsor is authorized to erect upon the Capitol Grounds such stage, sound amplification devices, and other related structures and equip- ment as may be required for the event.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Branch Appropriations for Fiscal Year 2001
    S. HRG. 106–820 LEGISLATIVE BRANCH APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001 HEARINGS BEFORE A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON H.R. 4516, 4577, and 5657/S. 2603 AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2001, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES Architect of the Capitol (except House items) Congressional Budget Office General Accounting Office Government Printing Office Joint Committee on Taxation Joint Economic Committee Library of Congress Office of Compliance U.S. Capitol Police Board U.S. Senate Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 62–802 cc WASHINGTON : 2001 For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont SLADE GORTON, Washington FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky TOM HARKIN, Iowa CONRAD BURNS, Montana BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama HARRY REID, Nevada JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire HERB KOHL, Wisconsin ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah PATTY MURRAY, Washington BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota LARRY CRAIG, Idaho DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois JON KYL, Arizona STEVEN J. CORTESE, Staff Director LISA SUTHERLAND, Deputy Staff Director JAMES H.
    [Show full text]
  • Congress's Contempt Power: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure
    Congress’s Contempt Power and the Enforcement of Congressional Subpoenas: Law, History, Practice, and Procedure Todd Garvey Legislative Attorney May 12, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL34097 Congress’s Contempt Power and the Enforcement of Congressional Subpoenas Summary Congress’s contempt power is the means by which Congress responds to certain acts that in its view obstruct the legislative process. Contempt may be used either to coerce compliance, to punish the contemnor, and/or to remove the obstruction. Although arguably any action that directly obstructs the effort of Congress to exercise its constitutional powers may constitute a contempt, in recent times the contempt power has most often been employed in response to non- compliance with a duly issued congressional subpoena—whether in the form of a refusal to appear before a committee for purposes of providing testimony, or a refusal to produce requested documents. Congress has three formal methods by which it can combat non-compliance with a duly issued subpoena. Each of these methods invokes the authority of a separate branch of government. First, the long dormant inherent contempt power permits Congress to rely on its own constitutional authority to detain and imprison a contemnor until the individual complies with congressional demands. Second, the criminal contempt statute permits Congress to certify a contempt citation to the executive branch for the criminal prosecution of the contemnor. Finally, Congress may rely on the judicial branch to enforce a congressional subpoena. Under this procedure, Congress may seek a civil judgment from a federal court declaring that the individual in question is legally obligated to comply with the congressional subpoena.
    [Show full text]
  • January 1, 2021 the Honorable Nancy Pelosi Speaker 1236
    January 1, 2021 The Honorable Nancy Pelosi The Honorable Kevin McCarthy Speaker Minority Leader 1236 Longworth House Office Building 2468 Rayburn House Office Building U.S. House of Representatives U.S. House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 Washington, DC 20515 Dear Speaker Pelosi and Minority Leader McCarthy: We write today in support of the existing Capitol Police Board regulations that have helped protect Members for more than 50 years and ask that you not include any provisions in the House Rules package that attempt to alter these protections. Currently, Members of Congress are allowed to carry firearms within the U.S. Capitol Complex as a result of U.S. Capitol Police Board’s regulations and 40 U.S.C. § 5104. The current regulations allowing Members of Congress to carry have helped protect these Members and their Second Amendment rights since 1967. There are substantial precedents for this type of regulation throughout the U.S. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, more than two dozen states allow guns in capitol buildings. Of those states, “nine permit ‘open carry,’ 13 allow firearms owners with permits to carry and four allow legislators or legislative staff to carry in the capitol.’” Washington, D.C. has a violent crime problem and D.C.'s violent crime rate is 158% higher than the national average. In 2020 alone, there have been more than 180 homicides, more than 1,500 assaults with a deadly weapon, and more than 1,800 robberies. Furthermore, there is a history of violent attacks on Members of Congress and Capitol Police.
    [Show full text]
  • The United States Capitol Police Hearing
    THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION MAY 20, 2015 Printed for the use of the Committee on House Administration ( Available on the Internet: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/administration/index.html U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 95–310 WASHINGTON : 2015 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Sep 11 2014 07:27 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 095310 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 E:\HR\OC\A310.XXX A310 SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan, Chairman GREGG HARPER, Mississippi ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania RICHARD NUGENT, Florida Ranking Minority Member RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois ZOE LOFGREN, California BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia JUAN VARGAS, California MARK WALKER, North Carolina PROFESSIONAL STAFF SEAN MORAN, Staff Director KYLE ANDERSON, Minority Staff Director (II) VerDate Sep 11 2014 07:27 Jul 08, 2015 Jkt 095310 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 6646 E:\HR\OC\A310.XXX A310 SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING UNITED STATES CAPITOL POLICE WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 2015 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON HOUSE ADMINISTRATION, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 2:10 p.m., in Room 1310, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Candice S. Miller [chairman of the Committee] presiding. Present: Representatives Miller, Harper, Nugent, Davis, Walker, Brady, Lofgren, and Vargas. Staff Present: Sean Moran, Staff Director; John Clocker, Deputy Staff Director; Bob Sensenbrenner, Deputy General Counsel; John L.
    [Show full text]
  • Capitol Grounds (Revised 10/6/14)
    United States Capitol Police Guidelines for Conducting an Event on United States Capitol Grounds (Revised 10/6/14) The guidelines described below, in accordance with the Traffic Regulations for US Capitol Grounds, are to ensure that events held inside the boundaries of US Capitol Grounds, are conducted in a manner that protects public health and safety yet ensures that the Congressional community can fulfill its legislative responsibility. Demonstration activity is defined as any protest, rally, march, vigil, gathering, assembly or similar conduct engaged in for the purpose of expressing political, social, religious or other similar ideas, views or concerns protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Demonstration activity is allowed in designated areas as indicated on Attachment A: the “United States Capitol Grounds Demonstration Areas Map.” Prohibited Areas: Groups of any size are prohibited from demonstrating in the following areas: 1. Inside of any Congressional Buildings 2. On the steps of the United States Capitol 3. On the steps of any building on Capitol Grounds 4. In any area otherwise closed or restricted for official use 5. In roadways or any area routinely used for vehicular traffic 6. Prohibited areas as identified in the “United States Capitol Grounds Demonstration Areas Map.” The following conditions apply to all activities occurring on U.S. Capitol Grounds and permitted by the U.S. Capitol Police Board, to ensure: 1. The safety and convenience of all people who exercise their First Amendment right to free expression 2. The safety and convenience of all people visiting Congressional Office Buildings as well as the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Branch: FY2010 Appropriations
    Legislative Branch: FY2010 Appropriations Ida A. Brudnick Analyst on the Congress June 11, 2009 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R40617 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Legislative Branch: FY2010 Appropriations Summary Approximately $5.0 billion was requested for legislative branch operations in FY2010, an increase of 14.5% over the FY2009 enacted level. The Subcommittees on the Legislative Branch of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees have held hearings during which Members considered the legislative branch requests. The House Appropriations Committee, Subcommittee on Legislative Branch held a markup of the FY2010 bill on June 11, 2009. The subcommittee version would provide $3.675 billion, not including Senate items. The full committee markup is scheduled for June 12, 2009. Previously, the FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-8, enacted on March 11, 2009) provided $4.4 billion for legislative branch activities. This represents an approximately 11% increase over the nearly $4 billion approved by Congress for FY2008. In FY2009, an additional $25 million was provided for the Government Accountability Office in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5). The House and Senate versions of H.R. 2346, the FY2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act, both contain $71.6 million for the new U.S. Capitol Police radio system. The Senate version also would provide $2 million for the Congressional Budget Office, to remain available until September 30, 2010, and authorize additional funds for the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 2346 passed the House on May 14, 2009, and the Senate on May 21.
    [Show full text]
  • 3. the Powers and Tools Available to Congress for Conducting Investigative Oversight A
    H H H H H H H H H H H 3. The Powers and Tools Available to Congress for Conducting Investigative Oversight A. Congress’s Power to Investigate 1. The Breadth of the Investigatory Power Congress possesses broad and encompassing powers to engage in oversight and conduct investigations reaching all sources of information necessary to carry out its legislative functions. In the absence of a countervailing constitutional privilege or a self-imposed restriction upon its authority, Congress and its committees have virtually plenary power to compel production of information needed to discharge their legislative functions. This applies whether the information is sought from executive agencies, private persons, or organizations. Within certain constraints, the information so obtained may be made public. These powers have been recognized in numerous Supreme Court cases, and the broad legislative authority to seek information and enforce demands was unequivocally established in two Supreme Court rulings arising out of the 1920s Teapot Dome scandal. In McGrain v. Daugherty,1 which considered a Senate investigation of the Justice Department, the Supreme Court described the power of inquiry, with accompanying process to enforce it, as “an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function.” The court explained: A legislative body cannot legislate wisely or effectively in the absence of information respecting the conditions which the legislation is intended to affect or change; and where the legislative body does not possess the requisite
    [Show full text]
  • Appointment and Confirmation of Executive
    Appointment and Confirmation of Executive Branch Leadership: An Overview name redacted Specialist in American National Government name redacted Analyst in Government Organization and Management June 22, 2015 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R44083 Appointment and Confirmation of Executive Branch Leadership: An Overview Summary The Constitution divides the responsibility for populating the top positions in the executive branch of the federal government between the President and the Senate. Article II, Section 2 empowers the President to nominate and, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint the principal officers of the United States, as well as some subordinate officers. These positions are generally filled through the advice and consent process, which can be divided into three stages: • First, the White House selects and clears a prospective appointee before sending a formal nomination to the Senate. • Second, the Senate determines whether to confirm a nomination. For most nominations, much of this process occurs at the committee level. • Third, the confirmed nominee is given a commission and sworn into office, after which he or she has full authority to carry out the duties of the office. The President may also be able to fill vacancies in advice and consent positions in the executive branch temporarily through other means. If circumstances permit and conditions are met, the President could choose to give a recess appointment to an individual. Such an appointment would last until the end of the next session of the Senate. Alternatively, in some cases, the President may be able to designate an official to serve in a vacant position on a temporary basis under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act or under statutory authority specific to the position.
    [Show full text]
  • Support Offices in the House of Representatives: Roles and Authorities
    Support Offices in the House of Representatives: Roles and Authorities Updated June 23, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov RL33220 SUMMARY RL33220 Support Offices in the House of June 23, 2020 Representatives: Roles and Authorities Ida A. Brudnick Article I of the Constitution, in Sections 2 and 3, authorizes the House of Specialist on the Congress Representatives and Senate to choose their own officers. The number of such congressional support personnel, as well as their specific responsibilities, is left to the discretion of the chambers. Over time, both chambers have authorized a number of offices that assist them, collectively or individually, in their work. In the House, these offices include the Clerk of the House, Chief Administrative Officer, Sergeant at Arms, Office of the Legislative Counsel, Office of the Parliamentarian, Office of the Law Revision Counsel, Office of Interparliamentary Affairs, Office of Congressional Ethics, House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, Office of the Inspector General, Office of General Counsel, House Chaplain, Historian of the House, Office of the Whistleblower Ombudsman, and Office of Diversity and Inclusion. These offices perform legislative, administrative, financial, and ceremonial functions. They also ensure the protection of Congress and preserve its institutional memory. The roles of House support offices have been established by House Rules, statute, and custom. They are also shaped by the congressional authorities with policy, oversight, and funding responsibilities for the offices. These include the House Administration Committee, the House Appropriations Committee, the House Office Building Commission, and the Office of the Speaker. Four of the officers—the Clerk of the House, Chief Administrative Officer, Sergeant at Arms, and Chaplain—are elected by the House.
    [Show full text]
  • Stopping Obstruction with Inherent Contempt Last Updated November 10, 2020
    Stopping Obstruction with Inherent Contempt Last updated November 10, 2020 Oversight is one of Congress’s fundamental roles. In ​Watkins v. United States​, the Supreme Court concluded, “the power of the Congress to conduct investigations is inherent in the legislative process. That power is broad. It encompasses inquiries concerning the administration of existing laws as well as proposed or possibly needed statutes.”1 The Congressional Research Service further defines oversight as, “making sure that laws work and are being administered in an effective, efficient, and economical manner.”2 Proper oversight prevents corruption and promotes accountability. It pushes the federal government to deliver for those it serves. In practice, Congress conducts oversight in a number of ways, including through documents requests and subpoenas and by conducting hearings, transcribed interviews, and depositions. However, the Trump Administration has obstructed Congressional oversight requests at a level never before seen.3 President Trump encapsulated his Administration’s approach in April 2019, when he stated, “We’re fighting all the subpoenas.”4 Regardless of who holds the office of the President however, Congressional oversight remains an important tool to ensure the integrity of the federal government. As the role of oversight has been deeply compromised by the Trump administration's repeated and deliberate obstruction, reinstating the inherent contempt power can be used to restore Congress's ability to conduct oversight. 1 Watkins v. United States, 354 US 178, 187 (1957)​. See also ​Eastland v. United States Servicemen’s Fund 421 U.S. 491, 504, n. 15 (1975) (“scope of its power of inquiry … is as penetrating and far-reaching as the potential power to enact and appropriate under the Constitution.”); Townsend v.
    [Show full text]
  • Flash Report – Independent Assessment of the AOC's Role in Securing the Capitol Campus for Large Public
    Flash Report Series OIG-AUD-2021-03 OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL MAY 05, 2021 Flash Report Series – Independent Assessment of the Architect of the Capitol’s (AOC) Role in Securing the Capitol Campus for Large Public Gatherings Flash Report OIG-AUD-2021-03 Results in Brief Flash Report – Independent Assessment of AOC’s Role in Securing the Capitol Campus for Large Public Gatherings May 05, 2021 Results (cont’d) Objective The objective of the independent assessment is to campus, if damaged may be irreplaceable and or gain an understanding of the AOC’s role and require replacement or repair at taxpayers’ expense. responsibilities in the preparation and execution of An increased sharing of information would allow operations to secure the Capitol campus, its the AOC to better plan, prepare and protect the structures, assets and artifacts during large public AOC staff and the assets in their care. Additionally, gatherings (e.g., July Fourth concerts, presidential AOC staff are the experts for the Capitol campus inaugurations, and First Amendment infrastructure. It would be beneficial to confer with demonstrations). these experts to understand the infrastructure and facilities in order to implement effective protection Results measures. To this end, Capitol campus law The AOC has an important role in the execution of enforcement agencies should communicate, operations to secure the Capitol campus during coordinate and collaborate with the OCSO experts large public gatherings, to include concerts, when preparing perimeter security plans for every presidential inaugurations and First Amendment large public gathering and event. demonstrations. However, we found the AOC’s role It would also be prudent for AOC to perform the and responsibilities for the preparation of security following: plans for large public gatherings is limited.
    [Show full text]