FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 12, 2001 www.indiantrust.com TRUST OFFICIAL BACKS COURT MONITOR'S FINDINGS THAT INTERIOR SKIRTED JUDGE'S ORDER ON IIM ACCOUNTS "Six Years to Start the Process Is a Difficult Delay to Defend" WASHINGTON, D.C. - A senior trust official repeatedly agreed today with the accuracy of findings by a court-appointed investigator who had concluded that the Interior Department purposely evaded a judge's order to reform the troubled Individual Indian Monies (IIM) trust and provide Indians with an accounting of their money. Thomas M. Thompson, the principal deputy in an office overseeing trust reform at Interior, described in detail how top Interior aides sought to avoid the expense and complexity of providing the accounting to individual Indian trust beneficiaries, despite a Dec. 21, 1999 order by U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth to do so. Thompson's testimony undercuts claims by government lawyers, who are challenging the findings of Court Monitor Joseph S. Kieffer III. Kieffer's findings form the basis for four of five contempt charges against Interior Secretary Gale Norton and Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs Neal McCaleb. Neither Norton nor McCaleb was in court today. Both Congress in 1994 and Lamberth in 1999 required Interior to clean up its mismanagement of the IIM trust. Asked by lead plaintiffs' lawyer Dennis M. Gingold if Interior's failure to comply by the year 2000 amounted to "unreasonable delay," Thompson said, "Six years to start the process is probably a difficult delay to defend." Interior officials were dragging their feet, Thompson said, in part because they hoped Lamberth's ruling would be overturned by a federal appeals court. "They were clearly betting on that," he said. "They were wrong," said Lamberth, who was upheld unanimously by the appellate court in February of this year. "Yes, sir," said Thompson. "They put all their eggs in one basket," the judge added, smiling. "Yup," Thompson said. Thompson also agreed with Kieffer's description of "internecine warfare" and "hostility" inside Interior as officials feuded over basic definitions of what was being required by Congress and the court. "Cooperation could have been a lot better," Thompson said. "We didn't agree on what a 'trust' was. We disagreed on a definition of an 'accounting.'" While the Office of the Special Trustee, where Thompson works, tried to act in the best interests of individual Indian trust beneficiaries, he said, the job of the Solicitor's Office at Interior was "to take care of the department and the Secretary." Thompson said his office fought often with both Solicitor's Office and Justice Department lawyers over what Interior was required to do and how much to report to Judge Lamberth about their lack of progress. "I thought we were close to the edge of trust law," he said. "It was a pretty contentious relationship," Thompson added. "It was not hard to hear" what each side was arguing because voices often were raised. Thompson's testimony continues on Thursday, December 13. #####