LITTLE ROCK — It puzzled me at the time. Why was the Department of Correction so intent on keeping secret certain elements of its so-called protocol for lethal injections?
As explained by department representatives when they came before the Freedom of Information Coalition a couple of years ago, it had something to do with concern that inmates might use the state Freedom of Information Act to gain access to some obscure or arcane bit of information whose disclosure might hamstring the execution process and generally upset the manufacturers and/or marketers of chemicals used in the process. Put the latter at a competitive disadvantage, maybe. I really can’t remember. All I remember is that the correctional representatives insisted that they were only trying to write into law what had been a policy for more than a decade.
Now comes a brewing controversy over whether a fly-by-night storefront sales operation in, of all places, London, England, has been supplying Arkansas with inferior drugs used in executions, drugs that might not only prove, for want of a better word, inefficient, and, what’s more, torturous, in their infliction of the ultimate state sanctioned punishment for heinous crimes.
Finally, I have my answer.
The matter no doubt will wend its way through the court system-yes, a lawsuit has been filed by a number of inmates on Death Row-and in the meantime we who serve on the FOI coalition will have opportunity to reflect again upon the importance of challenging any and all attempts to restrict openness in government.
The FOI coalition is a group of news media representatives and individuals interested in protecting the public’s right to know in Arkansas. During and between sessions of the Arkansas General Assembly, it monitors proposed changes in the state’s Freedom of Information Act and related practices, rules and regulations. When possible, the coalition invites public officials to discuss these matters and, when deemed necessary, sends representatives to testify before legislative committees on FOI matters.
Coalition members don’t get paid to do this. We don’t get per diem, although the Arkansas Press Association, which generously coordinates coalition activities, provides us with a meeting place and lunch when we have to interrupt our regular work schedules to get together. (Members and supportive news media organizations also have chipped in on the food, for which we’re all grateful. Sometimes these sessions go on for several hours.)
I’ve served on the coalition pretty much since its inception and hope to continue doing so even though my affiliation with this newspaper will end in a few days. No, I have not been intentionally vague about what I’ll be doing to make a living after I leave the Democrat-Gazette. I honestly have no idea. There’s no game plan.
But I want to stay involved in FOI matters because I believe firmly, zealously, in the public’s right-the public’s obligation-to know what its government is up to. We created it. We finance it. It owes us big time. I may no longer have a bully pulpit, modest though it is, but I still have a voice and I intend to use it. I am appreciative of the fact that coalition members want me to retain my seat at their table. You can call me the private-citizens’ representative if you like.
And why not? As I’ve said many times, the FOIA isn’t the news media’s law, it’s the people’s law. If I took up ditch digging tomorrow-here’s hoping that isn’t what the future holds because I’m a lot out of shape-I’d still want to protect my right to know what government is doing and how it’s going about it.
The FOI law was enacted to make it possible for the public, and for their representatives, including but not limited to reporters, to monitor the activities of their public officials because, as the law declares “[i]t is vital in a democratic society that public business be performed in an open and public manner . . . .”
As a wise member of the Arkansas Supreme Court wrote way back in 1977, “the Freedom of Information Act was enacted wholly in the public interest. . . .”
The essence of the state’s FOI law is accountability, which compels responsiveness. I truly believe that without openness in government, there will be little chance for either.
Associate Editor Meredith Oakley is editor of the Voices page.
Editorial, Pages 17 on 03/16/2011