Contractors Rarely Held Responsible for Misdeeds in Iraq

The list of alleged contractor misdeeds in Iraq has grown long in the past 3 1/2 years. Yet when it comes to holding companies accountable, the charges seldom stick.

Critics say that because of legal loopholes, flaws in the contracting process, a lack of interest from Congress and uneven oversight by investigative agencies, errant contractors have faced few sanctions for their work in Iraq.

And the inspector general's office credited with doing the most to root out waste and fraud is scheduled to go out of business by next October.

Senators from both parties said yesterday they would push to extend the work of the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, which has uncovered such problems as shoddy construction and bribery schemes.

Some also say more needs to be done to follow up on that office's work.

"Contractors know they can push prices up. They know they can be late," said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla). "They know they don't have to perform."

Contractors have done more work in the Iraq war than in any other conflict in American history, performing tasks as varied as serving meals and interrogating prisoners.

Stan Z. Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, a trade organization of government contractors, said they have done their best to do their work under extraordinarily dangerous conditions. "Many of the cases where performance was not what was expected, or even looked shoddy, were due to factors that were external, outside the contractors' control," he said.

The rules for holding contractors in a war zone accountable remain uncertain, with few precedents to go by.

"From a command-and-control point of view, I think we've got a problem. And it's going to be very difficult to solve," said Scott L. Silliman, executive director of the Center for Law, Ethics and National Security at Duke University.

For military contractors, Silliman said, it is unclear which laws apply. For example, they are not subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which governs soldiers' behavior. A law passed in 2000 that is supposed to hold contractors responsible if they commit crimes in war zones has never been tested.

Several civil cases have been tossed out of court for lack of jurisdiction. In September, for example, a judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by former Halliburton Co. truck drivers and their families who argued that the company knowingly sent a convoy into a raging battle without proper protection. A federal judge in Texas ruled that the Army, not Halliburton, was ultimately in charge and that the court could not "try a case set on a battlefield during wartime without an impermissible intrusion into powers expressly granted to the executive by the Constitution."