Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, April 7

State records-access draft raises alarm

By The Associated Press

Public access advocates have barely had time to catch their collective breath following the all-out push that led to passage in February of landmark changes to Pennsylvania's Right-to-Know Law.

Now they are facing a new front in their campaign to protect people's right to learn what their government is doing.

The Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts has just released a proposed set of policies for the review and photocopying of paper case records maintained by the 555 magisterial district courts.

District judges rule on minor offenses as well as set bail and hold preliminary hearings for even the most serious felonies.

Their records policies can be inconsistent, as documented in a 2005 statewide survey of public access to government information coordinated by The Associated Press.

The survey found that district courts provided access or partial access 90 percent of the time, but it highlighted a number of shortcomings.

In some cases, vital information was blacked out beyond the names of juvenile victims of sexual or physical abuse, as current policy allows. In other instances, surveyors were grilled about who they were or why they wanted the information.

The statewide court office developed the proposed new policy over the past year with input from district judges, court administrators, court clerks, and AOPC lawyers and staff. It was released last week for a two-month public comment period, and the Pennsylvania Newspaper Association immediately raised some concerns.

Melissa Melewsky, a lawyer for the newspaper trade group, said she was most troubled by a provision that would grant the state court administrator, with the Supreme Court chief justice's approval, discretion to withhold court records that present a risk to someone's security, their privacy or to the "fair, impartial and orderly administration of justice."

Melewsky said it could be used to reduce the broad right of access to court documents that Pennsylvanians traditionally have enjoyed, a right grounded in the federal and state constitutions as well as in common law.

"We certainly understand there needs to be limited access to Social Security numbers and bank account numbers and other legitimately risky information, but this section could be taken to any lengths," she said.

State court officials said it would be used as a safeguard.

"We don't know what tomorrow or next week's going to bring, and if for some reason there is some new issue that comes to light, we want to be able to have a mechanism to deal with that issue in a quick time frame," said AOPC lawyer David Price.

[BACK TO HEADLINES & DEADLINES HOME PAGE]