INSPECTOR GENERAL ISSUE UNRESOLVED; CONFIDENTIALITY DEBATE GOES ON.

Byline: Deborah Sullivan Daily News Staff Writer

Authorizing the LAPD inspector general to grant full confidentiality to witnesses could jeopardize city litigation or criminal investigations, city attorney and police officials warned Monday.

But former Inspector General Katherine Mader said not doing so could place the inspector general in a ``morally indefensible'' position of having to testify against witnesses who report wrongdoing.

``I think that the office is seen to be a safe haven for whistle blowers,'' particularly among military veterans in the police department, Mader told police Commissioners T. Warren Jackson and Gerald L. Chaleff at a hearing on the issue.

``It's really difficult to seek information that you need to do your job and to have people come to your office and trust you, and then be expected to testify against that person in a court proceeding,'' she said. ``I find it morally indefensible.''

The office of inspector general has been a subject of heated debate since Mader resigned in November amid frustrations with battling department brass and under questions from the commission about her performance. Mader has argued that the position needs greater power and independence, while police officials have resisted suggestions they believe infringe on the powers of the chief.

Deputy City Attorney Mark Burton said the confidentiality cannot be absolute because of state laws requiring officers to report criminal evidence and the city's right to legally sensitive information.

``For the city to properly address any potential liability, the city attorney must have access to testimony,'' Burton said.

Deputy Chief David Gascon said confidentiality cannot be absolute when a police employee reports potentially criminal misconduct by a co-worker.

``Some of these cases could turn out to be criminal cases,'' he said. ``And the need of investigators to have access to the people who have the information is paramount. We would not like to lose the ability to gather evidence.''

Interim Inspector General Deirdre Hill, a former Police Commission president who took over the job in January, said most of the witnesses she has talked to during her two months in office have not expected confidentiality. She said she was concerned that the current confidentiality provision protects only employees - and not community members - from retaliation.

``Certainly a citizen may also be concerned that an officer with the power of the law behind him might be able to retaliate as well,'' she said.

Police and commissioners also expressed concern that witnesses could use the office to shield themselves from disciplinary action by reporting misconduct and then claiming immunity.

Mader said what happens is sometimes the reverse, when witnesses face disciplinary action in retaliation for their testimony. About a dozen witnesses who complained to her of misconduct by others later faced disciplinary charges themselves for failing to report the behavior to police officials in a timely manner, she told commissioners.

West Valley Police Community Advisory Board member Bill Huber of Winnetka said the office is helpless without powers of confidentiality.

``If I were to go to an inspector general I would expect confidentiality,'' he said. ``If you don't have confidentiality, don't call it an inspector general. Call it an auditor or something else.''

While the commission debated the role of the inspector general, the city Personnel Department is seeking a permanent candidate for the post.

General Manager William Fujioka said the filing period for applications opens this week and runs through the end of April. He has already received about 20 advance applications, mostly from local professionals and many from the legal profession.

After the filing period, he said he will convene a blue ribbon committee of citizens to review the applications and recommend finalists. The Police Commission will then interview the candidates and decide on a hire.