Denied: Copies of investigative records on behalf of union member
June 30, 2009 Filed in: Denied
| Dept. of
Corrections | Non-criminal
investigations | Requester
status | Record
not in possession
Denied: An union
representative's request to the Department of
Corrections seeking copies of investigative
materials and a police report associated with a
union member.
From
the Pennsylvania Freedom of Information
Coalition
Denied: An union representative's request to the Department of Corrections seeking copies of investigative materials and a police report associated with a union member.
The DOC denied the request, citing the Right to Know Law exemption protecting non-criminal investigation records and the personal security exemption. It said it was not in possession of the police report requested.
The Office of Open Records, in responding to the appeal, noted its previous rulings regarding information relating to non-criminal investigations, and cited Stein vs. Plymouth Township AP 2009-0161 and Guli vs. Plumstead Township, AP 2009-0398.
" ... The RTKL exempts records of an agency relating to a noncriminal investigation," the OOR wrote, including 'investigative materials, notes, correspondence and reports.' In this case, the Citizen himself characterizes the information sought as investigative. The DOC has demonstrated that the records sought are investigative and were properly withheld."
The OOR also noted that the requester suggested that the subject of the investigation is entitled to the records on the basis of a personal right to know.
"The OOR disagrees. The RTKL provides access to public records only, as the OOR has stated in previous decisions:
Selepack vs. Department of Corrections -- AP 2009-0462
Denied: An union representative's request to the Department of Corrections seeking copies of investigative materials and a police report associated with a union member.
The DOC denied the request, citing the Right to Know Law exemption protecting non-criminal investigation records and the personal security exemption. It said it was not in possession of the police report requested.
The Office of Open Records, in responding to the appeal, noted its previous rulings regarding information relating to non-criminal investigations, and cited Stein vs. Plymouth Township AP 2009-0161 and Guli vs. Plumstead Township, AP 2009-0398.
" ... The RTKL exempts records of an agency relating to a noncriminal investigation," the OOR wrote, including 'investigative materials, notes, correspondence and reports.' In this case, the Citizen himself characterizes the information sought as investigative. The DOC has demonstrated that the records sought are investigative and were properly withheld."
The OOR also noted that the requester suggested that the subject of the investigation is entitled to the records on the basis of a personal right to know.
"The OOR disagrees. The RTKL provides access to public records only, as the OOR has stated in previous decisions:
- Rech v. Dept. of Education, AP 2009-0034
- Hawkins v. Pa. Dept. of Labor & Industry, AP 2009-0139
- Sunshine v. Dept. of Corrections, AP 2009-0322
Selepack vs. Department of Corrections -- AP 2009-0462