Freedom of Information Law Listserv (FOI-L@listserv.syr.edu)   10/20/03

DOJ SETS NEW STANDARD FOR REDACTING EMBARASSING DOCUMENTS

By Michael Ravnitzky, mikerav@mindspring.com

The Justice Department has established a new de facto standard of secrecy in
its redaction of a $2 million study that was suppressed for nearly two
years.

DOJ has in the last few days quietly and without any fanfare posted a
long-suppressed Attorney Workforce Diversity Study.

See the third item on:

http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/readingrooms/dag_foia1.htm

The redactions are unbelievable. The document is redacted to such an extent
that it demonstrates a reckless disregard of the existing DOJ instructions,
standard agency procedures and court decisions with regard to the release of
documents from government agencies under the Freedom of Information Act.

As one reads the redacted document, one senses the sheer paranoia that
permeates all discussion and handling of this document, and is reflected in
the overbroad redactions taken by the agency.

The Office of Information and Privacy at the Justice Department, which sets
Freedom of Information operating policies among federal government agencies,
has itself ignored many of its own recommendations and policies with regard
to processing Freedom of Information Act requests.

• the requests for this document took nearly two years to process, rather
  than the statutory 20 days
• the Office of Deputy Attorney General, which held the document, refused to provide a copy to the Office of Information & Privacy for internal
  processing for release for at least several weeks after a copy was requested
• the Justice Department has not released all segregable portions and
  instead has decided to withhold entire sections of the document en masse
• the Justice Department has withheld under the b(5) exemption material
  which should be released because it is not truly predecisional
• the Justice Department has withheld material under the b(5) exemption
  which should be released because it is not truly deliberative
• the Justice Department has withheld material under the b(5) exemption
  which should be released because it is factual and/or non-opinion material

In addition, the Justice Department has apparently decided not to release material on a discretionary basis which it feels is otherwise exempt, something it has the power to do, and has been encouraged to do until the Ashcroft secrecy memorandum.