Attorney General Ed Buckingham said the CNMI government respects the high court’s decision and will comply with its order.
He was referring to the decision of the CNMI Supreme Court that upheld the trial court ruling ordering the administration to disclose the documents requested by Rep. Tina Sablan, Ind.-Saipan, through the Open Government Act.
Buckingham noted that the high court decision sets a precedent.
“The Supreme Court carefully crafted a decision that defines what is, and what is not, a ‘public record’ for the purpose of this case and for other future cases,” he said, adding that the “the government is prepared to release records on Monday.”
The retainer arrangement in the case has been disclosed earlier.
Now, specific invoices will also be released to Sablan, who represented herself in the lawsuit.
Assistant Attorney General Braddock J. Huesman represented the government.
The high court agreed with the government’s position that certain records remain covered by attorney-client privilege, and did not direct their disclosure.
Press Secretary Charles P. Reyes Jr. said the government believed it had a vital public policy justification for the temporary non-disclosure of the requested information pending the outcome of the federalization lawsuit.
“The government was acting in good faith to protect a vital government function and uphold an urgent state interest in this case,” said Reyes. “By now, nearly every CNMI stakeholder has acknowledged the severe economic harms posed by federalization. The government was acting to protect our community’s vital interests.”
The high court’s 13-page slip opinion on Friday was signed by Chief Justice Miguel S. Demapan, Associate Justices Alexandro C. Castro and John A. Manglona.
“Upon placing the burden of proof on Sablan,” the justices said, “we find that she met her burden by demonstrating that the financial documents would not reveal any information that would disadvantage the commonwealth in its lawsuit against the federal government. Accordingly, the trial court’s order is affirmed.”
The justices added, “Public disclosure legislation provides a vehicle for citizens to remain informed about the decisions of respective agencies and offices throughout the commonwealth. Without such knowledge, accountability falters, and officials are at liberty to expend public funds with minimal oversight. Having followed the statutory directive to liberally construe the provisions of the Open Government Act in favor of disclosure, we find that the government must make the public records available for inspection.”
Sablan, in a statement, said: “The principles of justice, democracy, and honest government have prevailed with the Supreme Court’s decision, and for that I am both happy and grateful. I look forward to receiving the requested records on Monday, and will make them immediately available for public review.”
