![]() ![]() In 1996, Mississippi joined those states which have updated their public records laws for the electronic age. They are not codified with the Act, which has made them less visible. The legislature has scattered exemptions throughout the code. In general, the media and the public have failed to monitor the legislative process closely enough to mount any effective opposition to these exemptions. These include exemptions for medical examiner reports, § 41-61-63, and for case files of the Workers' Compensation Commission, § 71-3-66. Since passage of the 1983 Act, the legislature has steadily eroded its coverage by the adoption of exemptions. The Mississippi statute is not modeled on the records act of any other state, nor does it track the federal Freedom of Information Act. Quoting from the title, the Court held that the Act covered "records of all public bodies of government," even driver's license name lists formerly sold at a profit by the state. In the first decision by the Mississippi Supreme Court construing the Act, the Court relied in part on the title of the bill in the session laws. There is no official legislative history, other than the record of votes and proposed amendments in the legislative journals. It was not until 1983, however, that Mississippi adopted a generally applicable public records statute, now codified as Miss. Mississippi as early as 1941 recognized a right to inspect and copy public records such as land title records. All Mississippi journalists owe it to their readers, viewers and listeners to read the entire handbook, and then keep a copy handy for those times when FOI questions arise on the beat. This handbook was devised as a tool to help Mississippi journalists and others to understand this state's public records and open meetings laws, and to be prepared when government officials fail or refuse to abide by those laws. However, this state's laws are broad enough to give informed journalists a good chance of obtaining access to most newsworthy meetings or records. Mississippi's statutes are not among the nation's best in terms of opening government to public scrutiny. Conversely, the statutes can be abused by bureaucrats who do not want public scrutiny. Generally, these statutes have been interpreted by courts as giving the public the right to find out "what government is up to." The statutes, though rife with exceptions and loopholes, are powerful tools for journalists and others who know how to use them. In other words, the Mississippi Legislature and Congress decide whether government's doors and file drawers will be open to public scrutiny.įortunately, due in large part to media exposès and public mistrust of government in the past 30 years, state and federal statutes were passed to give the public access to government records and meetings. ![]() In reality, the only "rights" regarding public access to government records and meetings (other than trials) are defined by state and federal statutes and case law interpreting those statutes. Journalists and other members of the public often talk about their"right to know" about government business without fully understanding what that phrase really means. Other portions are Copyright, 1999, Phelps Dunbar, L.L.P. Portions of this handbrook were adapted from the "Digest of The Mississippi Open Meetings Law and The Mississippi Public Records Act," March 1, 1996, Copyright, 1996, The Mississippi Press Association. Hayes Johnson, Jr., of the law firm Phelps Dunbar, L.L.P., in Jackson, Mississippi, under a grant provided by the Mississippi Freedom of Information Coalition. "The freedom of speech and of the press shall be held sacred. First Amendment to the United States Constitution abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |