In another freedom of information request success, the Justice Department has released templates the FBI uses to generate National Security Letters. The FBI uses these letters to gain personal information on people they are investigating for national security matters, from entities such as internet service providers and financial and credit companies, according to The Wall Street Journal.  The FBI can request letters in security investigations without needing permission from a judge or grand jury.

The released templates are in response to an FOI request by the ACLU.  Some positive revelations from the templates include instructions for recipients who want to challenge the gag order implicit in each request for information.  Additionally, the templates show some information the FBI can request, including phone number, address, financial history, email and ‘to’ and ‘from’ email addresses.  However, the sections detailing what information companies can provide to comply with the request are heavily redacted, leaving some ambiguity as to what companies are providing.

Check out some of the templates:

NSL Template for Extensive Email or Internet Records

NSL Template for Financial Records

Whitney is the summer Pulliam/Killgore intern with SPJ. She recently graduated from Brigham Young University after studying journalism. Connect with her via email –  wevans@hq.spj.org –  or on twitter – @whitevs7

*Know something about Freedom of Information that you think we should cover in a blog post? We want to hear from you! Send information to wevans@HQ.SPJ.org. It may be featured in a future post.

Fast and Furious Contempt Vote

UPDATE: 4:44 p.m. ET: The House has voted to hold Eric Holder in contempt, 255-67.

The House Committee for Government Oversight and Reform will proceed today with the contempt vote against Attorney General Eric Holder. At this point, however, Representative Darrell Issa (R-CA) said he is not accusing theWhite House or Holder for knowing about the Fast and Furious operation. Rather, the Committee is looking for documents to reveal why the Department of Justice initially denied and later admitted to knowledge of the scandal.

“When did they know we were lied to and what did they do about it?”  Issa asked, according to CBS News.

The Fast and Furious operation refers to a 2009 gun-walking tactic resulting in more than 2000 guns to be walked across the Arizona/Mexico border in an attempt to trace the guns to suspected gun smugglers. The operation ultimately failed and resulted in unaccounted weapons and the death of border agent Brian Terry.

The National Rifle Association has given its support to the contempt proceedings and say today’s vote will influence which candidates they will back in the future. This move by the NRA may influence not only House Republicans but pro-gun House Democrats as well.

Whistleblower Involved in Gunwalking

Adding to the mess surrounding the contempt proceedings is the integrity of a key whistleblower, John Dodson, an ATF agent who has been implicated in a separate but concurrent gunwalking operation.  Dodson and his former supervisor, Dave Voth, have both claimed to have been against what has been termed the “Fernandez case,” referred to by Darrell Issa on ABC’s “This Week.”  Fernandez involves six guns that  Dodson purchased and delivered to gun-smuggling suspect Isaias Fernandez on June 1, 2010, according to Fox.  However, there is some dispute on whether Dodson instigated the transfer of guns or was simply following Voth’s orders.

An investigative report by Fortune claims the entire Fast and Furious episode is simply politics run out of control. In defense of Voth, Fortune says the ATF agents were legally limited by what they could do to curb the flow of guns. Arizona statute allows for easy purchase and resale of guns, and ATF had been in hot water for some of its earlier efforts at gun interception and agents’ hands were tied. In spite of ATF’s of gun walking, they unable to convince federal prosecutors to pursue the matter, Fortune said. Prosecutors said they needed more evidence than what had already been put forth.  In order to collect such evidence, the ATF unsuccessfully attempted a wiretap operation and subsequently, the gun smuggling continued.  The fallout was agent Brian Terry’s death and Dodson’s claim that Voth had pursued Fast and Furious despite his and others’ disapproval. Dodson also referred to an email in which Voth cites a “schism” between those who supported walking the guns and those who did not.  However, Voth claims Dodson and others reported events out of context as an attempt at retribution, and the schism referred to wire tapping, not gunwalking. *Update, 6/29/2012: The schism in the email actually referred to disputes among coworkers about the wiretap shift scheduling. Dodson was opposed to working weekends, and agents pulled in to help from other projects did not want to work the less desirable shifts.  Fortune further reported that Dodson walked the guns and then left on vacation without finalizing the operation or successfully tracking the guns.

Politically motivated? Does it matter?

Each side is decrying the political motivations of the other. Republicans cite an anti-gun agenda behind the gunwalking while Democrats see an attempt to embarrass the president during an election year. While there is likely some political motivation on both sides, my main question is whether the public has a right to the information Issa is requesting. Or is Obama’s use of executive privilege — the first in his administration — warranted in interest of preserving the integrity of an ongoing investigation and internal deliberations?

More info:

• Video from House Democrats:  Issa and Cummings on contempt vote
• NPR’s historical overview of executive privilege
• CNN on what will happen if Holder is held in contempt
• Check out the full Fortune investigation, including the full text of Voth’s “schism” email.

Whitney is the summer Pulliam/Killgore intern with SPJ. She recently graduated from Brigham Young University after studying journalism. Connect with her via email –  wevans@hq.spj.org –  or on twitter – @whitevs7

*Know something about Freedom of Information that you think we should cover in a blog post? We want to hear from you! Send information to wevans@HQ.SPJ.org. It may be featured in a future post.

President Obama has received criticism from news media and advocacy groups about its stance on transparency.  The administration set out with potential and the promise to be the most transparent administration to date. But reality has yet to match promises.

Efforts toward recovery such as the implementation of the Recovery Act have been overshadowed by the government’s seemingly aggressive stance toward whistleblowers.

However, they are doing some things right:

Office of Management and Budget

• In a response to the Food and Drug Administration’s email monitoring, the administration sent out a memo to chief information officers and general counsels in government offices warning them against such behavior. Among other things, the memo said monitoring emails with the intention of punishing a whistleblower might be illegal.  This was an attempt by the Office of Management and Budget to ensure employees’ confidence in their ability to report wrongdoing to government authorities.  The memo, written by Special Council Carolyn N. Lerner,  outlined the measures offices should take while monitoring emails.  This is a decisive move toward greater transparency and a hopeful shift in whistleblower protection.

Click here for more information on the memo and the facts surrounding the FDA’s email monitoring.

The Securities and Exchange Commission

• The Securities and Exchange Commission is preparing to pay out on its promise to reward those who expose corporate wrongdoing. Passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act paved the way for whistleblowers to receive compensation for the risks inherent with providing the information. While no one has been paid yet, the SEC assures the money is on its way. During the seven weeks following implementation of the act, 334 calls were made, spread between international entities and 37 states.  The SEC expects that number to climb as payouts continue and people see the efficacy of the program. The reason behind such a time lag between reporting and receiving the cash dividend is likely because of the lengthy nature of complaints and disputes.

“There are several types of securities fraud, and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission reports that the tips coming in cover most of them. One of the most common transgressions reported is financial statement fraud and lack of disclosure,” said Angie Mohr in an article provided to the SFGate by Investopedia.  “This is generally a difficult area for the SEC to investigate on its own. With detailed insider information, the SEC can determine whether a company is following reporting regulations.

This small step by the SEC will potentially create a haven for and remove some fear from a group that has historically been punished or vilified for exposing corruption.

Internal Revenue Service

• The IRS announced its plan to review the Whistleblower Office operations in an attempt to respond more quickly and effectively to claims, Bloomberg reported. This is likely in response to criticism from Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, Senator Charles Grassley (R-IAIowa) and others, who claim the Whistleblower Office has been slow and inefficient.

Check out the IRS memo here.

Whitney is the summer Pulliam/Killgore intern with SPJ. She recently graduated from Brigham Young University after studying journalism. Connect with her via email –  wevans@hq.spj.org –  or on twitter – @whitevs7

*Know something about Freedom of Information that you think we should cover in a blog post? We want to hear from you! Send information to wevans@HQ.SPJ.org. It may be featured in a future post.

Update on Attorney General Eric Holder contempt:

The House Committee of Government Oversight and Reform voted 27 to 17  Wednesday to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for failure to disclose documents related to the ‘Fast and Furious’ investigation.

Potential order of events:

• If Holder does not produce the desired documents, the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform will proceed with a full-chamber vote next week.
• The entire House would need to vote in favor of contempt
• The matter falls in the lap of  the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, who would need to determine whether to criminally indict Holder.

Look on this blog for additional updates on the case in the coming days and weeks.

Whistleblowing success:

A whistleblowing miner in Kentucky can have his job back , and is set to receive $30,000 in compensation.

Cumberland River Coal Company wrongfully discharged Charles Scott Howard in May 2011, said Administrative Law Judge Margaret A. Miller.  Judge Miller claimed Cumberland had been looking for ways to get rid of Howard after he told company officials about safety issues present in the mine in which he worked.

Howard was injured at his job in June 2010, and doctors cleared him to to return to work. However, one doctor who worked for the company disagreed with others, and Cumberland pulled the plug on Howard’s employment in May 2011. Judge Miller decided the company had ulterior motives and said Cumberland was  eager to get Howard — who has a history of whistleblowing — off the job.

“I find that the mine sought out and received the opinion they were seeking and immediately upon receipt of that single opinion, terminated Howard’s employment,” Miller wrote, according to CBS News.

This will mark Howard’s third court-enforced reinstatement to work.  The judge also ordered the company to pay a $30,000 fine for dismissing Howard.

Free Speech News Roundup:

• Robots are taking over the world! Or at least some might suggest that will be our fate if government chose to recognize the free-speech rights of sites like Google, Amazon and Facebook.  Read an opinion on why this may be one step too far, and an opinion on why government legislation in this matter makes no difference.
• A university can limit a student’s off-campus expression if it is not in concert with the professional standards of a student’s program, the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled.  The case involved Amanda Tatro’s 2009 Facebook comments, in which she alluded to stabbing “a certain someone in the throat” and talked about getting to play with the cadaver on which she was working.   After learning of Tatro’s post,  the school put her on academic probation and gave her an ‘F’ in the related anatomy-laboratory class. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that Tatro’s enrollment in a professional program made her subject to university regulation in her Facebook posts. Tatro was studying mortuary science at University of Minnesota.
• Vietnam officials are attempting to restrict online speech by pushing a decree requiring people to use real names and information online. The decree also sets forth a requirement for Internet providers to use Vietnamese-based servers and locate their offices in the country, according to Article 19. If passed, these decrees would give the Vietnamese government an uncomfortable amount of power over online free speech, suppressing the voices of those who could be holding them accountable.

Whitney is the summer Pulliam/Killgore intern with SPJ. She recently graduated from Brigham Young University after studying journalism. Connect with her via email –  wevans@hq.spj.org –  or on twitter – @whitevs7

*Know something about Freedom of Information that you think we should cover in a blog post? We want to hear from you! Send information to wevans@HQ.SPJ.org. It may be featured in a future post.

A small town in Massachusetts has imposed a $20 fine for swearing in public. In order to make punishments for offenses more actionable, residents of Middleborough, Mass., voted to make profanity in a public area punishable by fine, along with public marijuana smoking, drinking and dumping snow in roadways.

A similar measure has been on the books in Middleborough since 1968. However, while swearing was a crime in the 1968 ordinance, the new measure is an attempt to “decriminalize” and make it more likely for the police to enforce.

Rather than limit all swearing, this ordinance aims to curb loud profanity in the parks and downtown areas, city officials said, according to the Washington Post.

I’m really happy about it,” Mimi Duphily, a store owner and former town selectwoman, said after the vote, according to the Asociated Press. “I’m sure there’s going to be some fallout, but I think what we did was necessary.”

The First Amendment is an obvious concern. Court cases such as Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire and Cohen v. California helped establish freedom of speech. Profanity is allowable under the First Amendment except in cases of true threats, fighting words or an incitement to imminent lawless action.

“If the Massachusetts attorney general approves it, the ordinance would encourage police to ticket speech that is, and likely will eventually be found to be, constitutionally protected,” a Washington Post editorial said.

Whitney is the summer Pulliam/Killgore intern with SPJ. She recently graduated from Brigham Young University after studying journalism. Connect with her via email –  wevans@hq.spj.org –  or on twitter – @whitevs7

*Know something about Freedom of Information that you think we should cover in a blog post? We want to hear from you! Send information to wevans@HQ.SPJ.org. It may be featured in a future post.

The House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform will move forward with contempt proceedings against Attorney General Eric Holder, even after President Obama signed an executive order restricting access to documents in the botched Department of Justice “Fast and Furious” program, CNN reported.

In an attempt to possibly avoid the hearing, Attorney General Eric Holder met with Rep. Darrell Issa on June 19 to negotiate the release of additional relevant documents. After the  meeting, both parties continued to point fingers:  Holder’s camp claimed Issa refused the documents they offered, while Issa’s camp claimed Holder would not release the documents until the committee promised to cease pursuing the case.  Republicans took issue with the executive branch’s lack of transparency, while Rep. Elijah Cummings said Issa’s move was an attempt to embarrass the president. Cummings is ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform and attended the meeting between Holder and Issa.

“I’m just telling you, as a lawyer, I think that contempt is going far too far,” Cummings said in a CNN interview.

As a follow-up to the June 19 meeting, Holder sent a letter to President Obama requesting he exercise executive privilege over the release of the documents. Holder’s request was granted, and Deputy Attorney General James L. Cole sent a letter to Issa today informing him of the president’s decision.

“The documents responsive to the remaining subpoena items pertain to sensitive law enforcement activities, including ongoing criminal investigations and prosecutions, or were generated by Department officials in the course of  responding to congressional investigations or media inquiries about this matter that are generally not appropriate for disclosure,” Cole said in the letter to Issa.

Despite this, Issa said he still plans to progress with holding Holder in contempt for failing to produce all the documents the House Oversight Committee requested.

Check out:

• The video of Issa’s announcement: Contempt proceedings move forward.
• And a video of Representative Elijah Cummings response: Rep. Cummings speaks out against contempt.
• Also, check out Holder’s request for executive privilege.
• See the letter from Deputy Attorney General James M. Cole.
• CNN’s contempt vote Q&A.

By Melissa Nally

The United Nations Human Rights Council met yesterday, June 19, in its 20^th Session to discuss reports of two Special Rapporteurs that focus on protecting the rights of journalists. Both reports urge states to utilize international standards to combat growing problems by applying international human rights law on a domestic level and strictly enforcing it. The joint presentation of these reports indicates the concern over the widespread violations of the rights of journalists, and the need to alert the international community.

Christof Heyns, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, prepared a report on the mechanisms in place to provide greater protection for journalists. Concerned with the growing number of journalists killed or intimidated into self-censorship, the report cites the enforcement of an established international framework and how it translates to domestic laws and practices as the most immediate problem. The report aims to bring journalists’ deaths from a local issue to an international one by proposing measures that give at-risk journalists additional tools and steps to ensure greater accountability.

The Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, will present on protecting journalists and ensuring media freedom. La Rue’s report focuses on protecting journalists outside of armed conflict, which is when the majority of human rights violations against journalists occur. The report will explore the obstacles journalists overcome in reporting on controversial topics or events, the use of criminal laws to suppress coverage, and the problem of impunity. The report cites not a lack of an established international framework as the major problem, but the lack of effective measures to enforce it. It comes on the heels of a recent conference organized by the Middle East Regional offices of the UN Human Rights Office and the International Labor Organization to forge national frameworks for cooperation to remove legal restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression.

Read the full text of the Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.

Read the full text of the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

Melissa Nally is a 2012 Pulliam/Kilgore Freedom of Information Intern. She recently completed her first year at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law. Connect with Melissa atmelissa.nally@gmail.com.

‘Never Seconds’ gets a second chance

The Argyll and Bute Council in Scotland recently reversed its decision to ban 9-year-old Martha Payne from taking pictures of her school lunch after a global response to their June 15 decision.

Payne, who with her NeverSeconds blog was bringing awareness to the poor-quality lunches in her school, says the food quality improved during her coverage. Her daily blog posts from Lochgilpead, Scotland,  featured a picture of the day’s food (hand-drawn if she forgot her camera – see June 11 post) and a health and food-o-meter grade for each meal. Lunch eaters from around the world also wrote in with posts on their school’s lunches.

The Council initially banned Payne from taking pictures because they said the school’s caterers were afraid of getting fired. However, after protests came in, including appeals from celeb chefs Nick Nairn and Jamie Oliver, the Council reversed course.

Council leader Roddy McCuish announced they would withdraw the ban. He said, “It’s a good thing to do, to change your mind, and I’ve certainly done that,” the Daily Mail reported.

Martha’s father, Dave Payne, who has supported his daughter’s blogging,  said Martha is upbeat about the positive changes.

“She is delighted she can carry on blogging, but more so about the money being raised for the charity. People have been very, very generous. The way the world reacted to the ban is very revealing, it’s just fantastic that common sense has prevailed,” Dave Payne said, according to the Daily Mail.

A fundraising effort through her blog has raised more than £84,000 (a little over $131,000)  for charitable organization Mary’s Meals.  The charity plans to build a kitchen in Malawi with some of the funds providing food to hungry children there, the BBC reports. Martha Payne said she plans to name the kitchen “Friends of Never Seconds” for those whose donations made her work possible.

Whitney is the summer Pulliam/Killgore intern with SPJ. She recently graduated from Brigham Young University after studying journalism. Connect with her via email –  wevans@hq.spj.org –  or on twitter – @whitevs7

*Know something about Freedom of Information that you think we should cover in a blog post? We want to hear from you! Send information to wevans@HQ.SPJ.org. It may be featured in a future post.

Holder – done  Holdin’ out?

Representative Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has agreed to postpone a contempt vote against Attorney General Eric Holder, provided Holder discloses the additional documents relating to the failed gunwalking operation Fast and Furious.  Holder has expressed willingness to compromise and turn over documents showing how the government learned about specifics in the Fast and Furious operation. The rest of the documents, he said, were not within the Oversight Committee’s interest in the investigation.  Holder also offered to meet with  Issa, chairman of the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform by today to discuss the controversial withholding of documents in relation to the operation.

This is in the midst of the investigation into  Fast and Furious , where the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives  intentionally let weapons purchased by traffickers  across the border to strengthen their case. The fallout of the case included the death of Brian Terry, a U.S. Border Patrol agent.

“The department’s willingness to provide these materials is a serious, good-faith effort to bring this matter to an amicable resolution,” Holder said, according to the  New York Times. “We believe that this briefing, and the documents we are prepared to provide — which will include information you have requested regarding whistle-blowers — will fully address the remaining concerns identified in the recent letters to me from you and House leadership.”

This is in response to Issa’s June 16 letter in which he said he could compromise the June 20 contempt vote, but only if Holder submitted a “serious proposal,” Politico reports.

“Let me be clear – if the Department of Justice submits a serious proposal for how it intends to alter its refusal to produce critical documents subpoenaed by the Committee, I am ready and willing to meet to discuss your proposal,” Issa said to Holder in a June 13 letter.

Rumor has it: Two sources close — or formerly close — to Holder have come to Issa seeking protection as whistleblowers, according to Sipsey Street Irregulars‘ Mike Vanderbeogh and National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea ,  The Examiner reports. An anonymous source with knowledge of the gunwalker investigation likened whistleblowers’ information to “keys to the kingdom as far as Holder is concerned.”

Other open government news:

Update: The Senate Appropriations Committee told the Department of Labor to cooperate with media in finding a mutually-agreeable policy that would serve the needs of both parties, Bloomberg Businessweek reports. Read more here.

Bonus near $500K  has some questioning lobbyist’s motives

Thomas MacKenzie,  a former Northrop Grumman lobbyist, received nearly $498,334 as a bonus in 2011 after leaving the company to work for the House Armed Services Committee, incidentally taking a near $400,000 paycut, according to the Project on Government Oversight.  Northrop Grumman is one of the largest weapons makers in the world and could stand to benefit by having someone on their side on the Committee, according to Lee Fang of the Republic Report.

Whitney is the summer Pulliam/Killgore intern with SPJ. She recently graduated from Brigham Young University after studying journalism. Connect with her via email –  wevans@hq.spj.org –  or on twitter – @whitevs7

*Know something about Freedom of Information that you think we should cover in a blog post? We want to hear from you! Send information to wevans@HQ.SPJ.org. It may be featured in a future post.

Text Messages, Emails are Public Records in Illinois

A city council member in Champaign, Ill., tried to withhold text and email messages between council members in response to a records request by local media. The council member claimed messages were exempt since they were sent from personal devices.  However, Sangmon County circuit court Judge John Schmidt ordered text and other electronic messages sent by the council to be turned over.

Exemption Caught in the Nick of Time in Connecticut

An exemption was proposed during a special legislative session in Connecticut that would allow the state to withold dealings with companies seeking financial assistance from the  state.

The exemption would exclude records between the state and companies looking to grow or move into Connecticut that request financial help from the state “…provided the disclosure of such records could adversely affect the financial interest of the state, the business or organization.” Media outlets and FOI advocates took issue with the broadly stated exemption, originally slated to pass during the June 12 legislative session.

“This is as outrageous an assault on the public’s right to know as one could imagine,” said Matt DeRienzo, group editor of Group Register Company’s Connecticut publications on a Connecticut Newsroom blog post.

However, as media outlets reacted to the overly broad wording of the bill, the government responded: The amendment was stricken from Tuesday’s special legislative  session.

Special Police Unit in Uganda

Uganda has created a special police unit to respond to abuses against media and journalists. The Press Unit comes at a much needed time for the country where there were 100 recorded cases of journalists being attacked in 2011.

“This development comes at a critical time when journalists in Uganda are starting to lose hope of getting justice for the numerous abuses and violations meted against them by both state and non-state actors,”  said Henry O. Maina, Director, ARTICLE 19 Eastern Africa, ARTICLE 19 reported.

* The June 6 FOI FYI blog post mentioned various testimonies during the  House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform’s hearing on the lockout policies set forth by the Department of Labor. We failed to mention that Lucy Dalglish, while executive director of Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press, was testifying on behalf of the Sunshine in Government Initiative. The Sunshine in Government Initiative is a conglomerate of media groups, including the Society of Professionals Journalists, aimed at promoting government transparency.

SGI members (according to the SGI website):

• American Society of News Editors
• Associated Press
• The Association of Alternative News Media
• National Newspaper Association
• Newspaper Association of America
• Online News Association
• Radio, TV, Digital News Association
• Reporter’s Committee for Freedom of the Press
• Society of Professional Journalists

Whitney is the summer Pulliam/Killgore intern with SPJ. She recently graduated from Brigham Young University after studying journalism. Connect with her via email –  wevans@hq.spj.org –  or on twitter – @whitevs7

*Know something about Freedom of Information that you think we should cover in a blog post? We want to hear from you! Send information to wevans@HQ.SPJ.org. It may be featured in a future post.