In July of 2022, after months of protests demanding this, a Kenai Grand Jury was convened for the sole purpose of investigating citizen concerns of systemic corruption within Alaska’s judicial system. Of particular concern was: (1) evidence that the Alaska Commission on Judicial Conduct (ACJC) is falsifying official investigations to keep corrupt judges on the bench and ruling over We-The-People and (2) evidence that the Alaska Supreme Court and other entities are covering up the ACJC's corruption. (See evidence at alaskastateofcorruption.com)
When the Kenai Grand Jury subpoenaed and questioned the ACJC's only judge investigator since 1989 (35 years and counting in this position), she refused to answer questions. The Jury also looked into subpoenaing and questioning all the individual Alaska Supreme Court justices.
On April 28, 2023 (after investigating for nearly a year) the Kenai Grand Jury issued a Report and Recommendation on what it found. (See “ITMO Investigation Into Alleged Corruption - Grand Jury Return on 04/28/2023 Case No. 3KN-22-00003 GC”) It also indicted, for felony perjury, one of the judges the ACJC investigator appeared to have covered up for by falsifying an official investigation.
On February 27, 2024 Judge Thomas Matthews dismissed the judge’s indictment and on April 18, 2024 his office stated that the Kenai Grand Jury Report and Recommendation will never be given to the public – even though the Kenai Grand Jury’s “independent prosecutor” confirmed the Jury intended the Report and Recommendation to be made public. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests were filed and denied.
Alaska's Constitution
“The power of grand juries to investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety shall never be suspended.” Article 1, Section 8 of Alaska’s Constitution.
The 55 Constitutional Convention Delegates explained why they wrote these words into our Constitution:
“The power of grand juries to inquire into the willful misconduct in office of public officers, and to find indictments in connection therewith, shall never be suspended.” Alaska Constitutional Convention, December 15, 1955.
“The grand jury is preserved, for all purposes, particularly for investigation of public officials.” Alaska Constitutional Convention Commentary on the Preamble and the Declaration of Rights
“The grand jury can be appealed to directly, which is an invaluable right to the citizen.” Alaska Constitutional Convention Transcription, page 1328
See also the original Alaska Grand Jury Handbook (distributed by the Alaska Supreme Court), pages 5 to 7:
“A citizen is at liberty to apply to the Grand Jury for permission to appear before it in order to suggest or urge that a certain situation should be investigated by it… Charges of crime may be brought to your attention in several ways: (4) by private citizens heard by the Grand Jury in formal session, with the Grand Jury’s consent.” The handbook also specifically highlights how the Grand jury has the “important duty of making investigations on its own initiative” to “investigate how officials are conducting their public trust.”
Conclusion
It is clear corrupt judges and a cover up are unacceptable concerns to “the public welfare or safety”.
It is clear that not allowing the public to see the uncensored Kenai Grand Jury Report and Recommendation violates the “anti-suspension” clause of Article 1, Section 8 of Alaska’s Constitution.
It is also clear there is a direct conflict of interest in the Alaska Supreme Court and Alaska's judges stopping the public from seeing the results of a year-long Kenai Grand Jury investigation into corruption and cover up by the Alaska Supreme Court, Alaska’s judges, and the ACJC.
We-The-People require this Alaska Supreme Court to obey Article 1, Section 8 by immediately making public the uncensored Kenai Grand Jury Report and Recommendation concerning Alaska’s judicial corruption.
If this Supreme Court refuses to make the Report and Recommendation public, the only options Alaskans have not yet tried are courthouse sit-ins and citizen’s arrest of corrupt judges and those who cover up for them.
In the bitter end, exactly what would it hurt for all Alaskans to hear what the Kenai Grand Jury found during its year-long investigation into government corruption? Especially when this is protected by our Constitution. Does the government have something to hide? (The ACJC gets about 20 complaints against judges per month - so the ACJC investigator who refused to answer the Kenai Grand Jury’s questions has conducted well over 8000 judge investigations so far. The Kenai Grand Jury confirming that the investigator is falsifying investigations to keep corrupt judges on the bench would do more to protect the public welfare and safety than anything else in Alaska’s history – but it would also shake the public’s trust in Alaska’s judicial system, across the world.)
If so please sign the below Petition!
Call (907) 398-6403 so completed forms can be picked up and included in our submission to the Alaska Supreme Court. They can also be mailed to: PO Box 123 Soldotna, AK 99669 or emailed to haeg@alaska.net. You may also text pictures of your completed form to the phone number above. Feel free to copy and distribute this form far and wide. Alaska Grand Jurors Association.org
“To cover up their corruption, officers created even more: they falsified official reports and perjured themselves to conceal their misdeeds. In the face of this problem, the Department allowed its systems for fighting corruption virtually to collapse. It had become more concerned about the bad publicity that corruption disclosures generate than the devastating consequences of corruption itself. As a result, its corruption controls minimized, ignored and at times concealed corruption rather than rooting it out. Such an institutional reluctance to uncover corruption is not surprising. No institution wants its reputation tainted – especially a Department that needs the public’s confidence and partnership to be effective. Since no entity outside the Department was responsible for reviewing the Department’s success in policing itself, years of self-protection continued unabated until this Commission commenced its independent inquiries.” New York City’s 1994 Mollen Commission Report
