The Judicial Selection Commission has changed its internal rules to allow disclosure of the names on the list of potential nominees for judicial appointments forwarded to the governor for consideration.
The move takes the decision on whether or not to publicly disclose the names of finalists out of the hands of Governor Abercrombie, who was hit with a lawsuit brought by the Honolulu Star-Advertiser over the issue.
Until the commission’s action, Gov. Abercrombie had said he was considering whether or not to appeal a decision by Circuit Court Judge Karl Sakamoto that the law requires public disclosure.
The commission’s rules were amended as of November 15, according to the version posted on commission’s web site.
The section of the commission’s rules dealing with confidentiality has been amended as follows:
A. Under the Constitution of the State of Hawai‘i, the commission’s deliberations must be confidential. Therefore, except as otherwise provided in these rules, the following information shall not be disclosed outside of any commission meeting: information relating to the identity of any applicant; information received from or about applicants and petitioners; and any communications among or votes by commissioners on any subject. (Amended and effective 11/15/11)
B. This mandate of confidentiality survives commissioners’ terms of office and must be observed in perpetuity. (Amended and effective 11/15/11)
C. The commission shall release lists of its nominees for judicial office concurrent with its submission of each list to the appointing authority. (Amended and effective 11/15/11)
Earlier today, I wrote that the governor didn’t seem to understand that this is a no-win issue for him.
If he had won in court, and secrecy prevailed, he would have alienated a significant chunk of his political base who understand that open government is a prerequisite for good government, at least in the long run.
If he pressed the case on appeal and lost, he would end up looking like a stubborn old pol who squandered public resources on an ill-advised power struggle against the public interest.
I said it was time for the governor to cut his losses by gracefully acknowledging the court’s ruling, acknowledging the authority of the law, and complying without further appeal.
That way, in my view, the public wins and the governor cuts his political losses.
But now the Judicial Selection Commission has preempted the governor by rewriting its own rules to allow greater transparency, based on an independent assessment of the constitutional requirement.
It remains to be seen whether the move takes the governor off the hot seat without requiring him to publicly abandon his previous position or to “eat crow,” as he recently put it.
“I’ve always taken the position that when you have to eat crow, you should get that bird down your throat as quick as possible,” he said.
In light of the commission’s action, it’s interesting to that two members of the commission have been strong First Amendment and open government advocates who have previously represented media clients. Jeff Portnoy was appointed by Gov. Abercrombie to a term that began in April 2011, while Jim Bickerton was named by the Bar Association in 2009.
I would certainly expect that they would been a knowledgable and persuasive participants in the commission’s internal debate over this issue. But we’ll never know, because of that provision in commission rules requiring lifetime confidentiality of internal discussions and communications.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
No question, Ian, that Neil’s strange penchant for secretiveness is spoiling his administration in many ways.
It doesn’t matter, Ian. People in Hawaii will still pull the lever for him because they can’t be bothered to think about this stuff.
WooWoo,
How is this line of thinking useful? You insult Hawaii voters, yet expect them to listen to your views and vote for your candidates?
Maybe we are less stupid than you think? While we may sometimes be fooled by people who pretend to be our friends, it is less difficult to see when people hold us in open contempt.
Seriously, you comments here disappoint me. I have seen you make very intelligent observations before. I guess you have given up from frustration and re now willing to tell Hawaii’s people what you really think?
And you wonder why, despite our frustrations with Democrats, we do not turn to you Republicans for leadership?
Geesh Kolea, we must both be in funny moods. I’ve gotten a pass from you on much more controversial statements.
It’s not a matter of whether this line of thinking is “useful” or if I’ve “given up” on the voters of Hawaii. It’s a matter of being a political junkie as a hobby and not a profession.
FACT: an immeasurably small portion of the populace will even be aware of this judicial selection flap. Do I think this is important? Hell yes! But how many people are going to state during an exit poll that this was a factor?
And since you want to bring Rs into this, I’ll be the first to admit that the reason why Guv Ab will be re-elected is that we have no viable challengers.
“provision in commission rules requiring lifetime confidentiality of internal discussions and communications”
WTF? Why is a lifetime of sworn secrecy required for their deliberations? It’s not like these people are Navy SEALs planning covert missions. Or are they…
I’d think that will all the rotten history surrounding the judiciary, from Fat Boy to Broken Trust, people would want to go the extra mile to prove we aren’t back in the swamp. At least i’d think so…
Another thought related to gov’t secrecy: how on earth did a Major in HPD get so senior and have so much trouble? He was senior leadership. Who knew what when? Who else is on the take? This is a huge black eye for HPD, and no one is saying anything, and if history is any indication, we will never know. We won’t even know if anyone is asking the hard questions behind closed doors. sweet!
Here is the JSC’s press release announcing the rule amendment: http://www.inversecondemnation.com/inversecondemnation/2011/11/judicial-selection-commission-public-will-know-the-names-of-judge-nominees-at-the-same-time-the-gove.html
Quite aside from being so pa`akiki on this issue, his pettiness and vindictiveness in removing the OIP attorney who “spoke truth to power” about it is what is so breathtaking and disappointing in this whole dust-up. There was no reason to have filled her regular position so that she had no job to fall back on — other than sheer spite!