OKLAHOMA CITY – Reps. Tom Gann, R-Inola, Kevin West, R-Moore, and Rick West, R-Heavener, today issued statements regarding Oklahoma Corporation Commissioner Todd Hiett's response brief to the writ of prohibition they filed against Hiett. Their writ asked the courts to intervene to protect the public interest. Hiett has been accused of sexual molestation and public drunkenness. The three argue that he should be disqualified from cases at the OCC involving the victims or witnesses to his alleged crimes saying he cannot be impartial or unbiased.

“Todd Hiett’s response brief is most notable for what it doesn’t say. He doesn’t deny any of the criminal conduct allegations that have been publicly made against him," the lawmakers said.

"He doesn’t deny that the utilities and other parties with direct knowledge of that conduct have leverage over him and his decisions in their cases at the OCC. He also doesn’t claim that he is somehow exempt from state ethics rules and the Code of Judicial Conduct. Instead, he argues that the petitioners haven’t proved that he’s guilty or biased.

“But the law says we don’t have to prove it. The State Ethics Rule 4.7 makes it clear that an official should disqualify himself or herself if 'the circumstances would cause a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts to question his or her impartiality in the matter.' The Code of Judicial Conduct contains a similar provision.

"That is clearly the case here. Yet, since Hiett refuses to disqualify himself, we have asked the court to step in and disqualify him to protect ratepayers. Even what Hiett’s response brief does argue is damning – especially where it says ‘the rule of necessity requires that Commissioner Hiett not be disqualified’ (Response, page 10). As mentioned in the Petitioners’ original brief (footnote 42), the ‘Rule of Necessity’ is a common law principle that says in effect that a biased judge is better than no judge at all, and allows a biased judge to participate in a case if the case cannot be heard without him. 

“But before the ‘Rule of Necessity’ can apply, the judge either has to admit to being biased or be found to be biased.

"To argue ‘the rule of necessity requires that Commissioner Hiett’ participate in these cases means that Hiett is admitting he is conflicted in these cases! If he’s conflicted, there must be a reason. It comes surprisingly close to an admission of guilt to the criminal conduct allegations themselves.”