Lawmakers are considering a bill that would ask voters whether the state Constitution should be amended to require the Judicial Selection Commission to publicly disclose lists of judicial nominees it sends to the governor or chief justice for consideration and final approval.
The League of Women Voters testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Friday in support of the bill, saying that requiring the commission to release its list of nominees would promote public discussion regarding judicial nominees and improve the public’s confidence in the Judiciary.
"We strongly think the public has an interest in knowing which names were sent to the governor," Janet Mason, vice president of the league, told committee members.
A representative from Attorney General David Louie’s office said the attorney general opposes House Bill 420 because a lack of confidentiality in the judicial nomination process could have a negative effect on the applicant pool.
Judiciary Chairman Rep. Karl Rhoads (D, Chinatown-Iwilei-Kalihi) deferred decision-making on the bill to next week but said he is inclined to move it along.
"It’s just a matter of transparency; there’s no reason not to (pass it)," Rhoads said. "The issue’s been raised that it’s going to keep people from submitting their names, but the only ones whose name will be revealed are the handful that are actually suggested … so I don’t really put a whole lot of stock in that argument. I just think, hey, if you want to be a judge, you’re going to have to take the risk that something like that’s going to happen, because it’s an honor."
The Honolulu Star-Advertiser sued Gov. Neil Abercrombie in August 2011 to obtain the names of judicial candidates he was considering appointing as judges.
The lawsuit alleged that Abercrombie’s refusal to disclose the names of four to six judicial candidates on a list he received from the state Judicial Selection Commission violated the state Uniform Information Practices Act, which mandates that government records be open to the public. The Governor’s Office, however, said the names were exempt because not keeping them confidential could have a "chilling effect" on applicants.
Circuit Judge Karl Sakamoto ruled almost two months later in favor of the Star-Advertiser and ordered Abercrombie to release the names, which he did on Nov. 26, 2011.
The Judicial Selection Commission said disclosing names of nominees is now current practice, but it neither supports nor opposes the proposed measure.
