The FBI continues to try and shield itself from public oversight and accountability. The Bureau is in court defending its decision to use automated, computerized searches for documents requested under the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) in lieu of conducting a search through paper files. The automated searches have missed many documents that a hand search of paper files may have uncovered. The AP reports:
Justice Department guidelines say the law requires a search "reasonably calculated to uncover all relevant documents."
Legal and academic critics say the search in this case didn't meet that standard. They said they suspect the transfer of records from paper to electronic files has become an excuse for doing cursory searches that the government knows won't retrieve all relevant documents.
If the FBI is successful, then FOIA loses much of its meaning. Requests under FOIA would only turn up documents that the FBI can produce with a few keystrokes on their computers, rather than producing what the FBI can legally produce, but which might require (gasp!) the Bureau actually searching through files. This would be an excuse useful in covering up abuse and corruption, yet even more likely, is a great excuse for laziness.
MORE: A trackback to this post takes you to another blog with this interesting comment:
The FBI is just embarrassed and trying to take attention away from how bad their search systems really are.
The scary part? Search is pretty central to their jobs, pretty central to catching bad guys, and pretty central to keeping us all safe.
It looks like they really weren’t trying to hide those other files (in the CBS story). It looks like they really couldn’t find them.
Regardless of the FBI's intent, if the Bureau succeeds in court then FOIA will be weakened. But the author of this comments makes a good point: the FBI has computer and database systems--which are crucial to tracking and identifying terrorists--that aren't working.
U.S.A. vs. Stella M. Nickell is a pro bono matter I've been working on for over five years. Several instances of prosecutorial misconduct in the form of Brady violations popped up after I received over 1,000 pages of hard copy as a result of an FOIA request. The original request was submitted by Frederick Whitehurst, Phd/JD; well known for his exposing the phony "scientists" permeating the famous FBI lab. The result exposed the involved FBI agents and the prosecution as being solely responsible for exculpatory data being hidden from the defense team, and of course were not the subject of examination or cross in trial.
If this restriction were in force at the time this request were made we would probably never be able to identify the items that were wrongfully withheld from the record in the Nickell case. This restriction will generate a tragic void in the flow of information needed to protect the justice system. Incredibly sad event for fact finders everywhere.
Posted by: Al Farr | Jan 24, 2005 at 11:05 AM