The ongoing saga of Edward Snowden and his legal troubles in the wake of his disclosure of classified information has generated lively discussion about the role of government surveillance in creating security for our society.  Many people are debating whether or not the government should be keeping secrets about its surveillance activities.  I recently heard an interview on the radio in which the guest explained that, in his opinion, secret security systems were ineffective, because they are not improved by being subjected to scrutiny and constant testing.  While this may be a valid point for computer firewalls and the like, I think this misunderstands the justification for government secrecy in some programs.

The purpose of keeping information from general dissemination is -- or at least should be -- to prevent the information from benefiting those who would do harm to society.  For example, if the police are aware that organized criminals are using a particular location to discuss their murder plans, and they can plant a listening device in that location, allowing the general public to know about the device will defeat its purpose.  The criminals will simply find another, more private, location to hatch their plan.  In situations such as this, secrecy is key.  Secrecy is a problem, on the other hand, when it is used to prevent the public from uncovering illegal activity.  Unfortunately, many people assume that information is kept secret for the latter reason, when in actuality it is for the former.

Please keep this in mind when seeking information from the government.  For the most part, the people working in these areas are genuinely motivated by a desire to help their fellow citizens, by stopping those who would seek to harm us.  This includes most police officers and intelligence professionals.  They generally have no interest in your personal discussions about what to make for dinner, and would rather focus on discussions about criminal activity.  If you request documents about a particular government program and are denied because the information is classified, do not assume that the program is targeting you.

Public records, especially those held by law enforcement agencies, are subject to many rules, some of which directly contradict each other.  While the basic rule in Arizona (and most other states with strong public records laws) is that any record held by a public agency is open for inspection by the public, there are some important limits on this rule.  Some are imposed by federal statutes and regulations, some by state statutes and regulations, and some by case law.

As an initial matter, it is important to note that the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) does not apply to state public records.  If you want a police report from your local police department, do not invoke FOIA.  They may give you the report anyway (because the state public records law says they should), but they may deny your request because you cited the wrong statute.

While Arizona's public records law generally gives the public access to any public record, it allows certain information to be withheld or redacted to protect those vulnerable to attack.  Identification and contact information for a crime victim cannot be disclosed.  The home address and home telephone number of certain individuals involved in law enforcement (which can include not just police officers, but also prosecutors, and people who work in this area) is confidential.  Photographs of police officers may only be released in certain circumstances.  Federal risk assessments of infrastructure (such as telecommunications or utilities) are exempt from disclosure.

Information may be withheld for certain important purposes.  For example, the location of an important archaeological find may be withheld to protect the site from vandalism or damage.  If the custodian of a record believes that a record that is requested for commercial purposes (such as to compile a mailing list for business solicitations) will be abused, the custodian may seek an order from the governor preventing the record from being released.  Adoption, severance, and dependency records held by the juvenile court are exempt.

Some information that is considered private and confidential is exempt from disclosure.  For example, some information contained in a public employee's personnel file, such as Social Security numbers and medical information, is protected (but not completely prohibited) from disclosure by federal law.  Disciplinary actions, however, are not confidential, and are required to be disclosed.

Finally, Arizona courts have found that certain records may be withheld if the agency believes that "the interests of privacy, confidentiality, or the best interest of the state in carrying out its legitimate activities outweigh the general policy of open access."  This exception is usually invoked to protect the details of an ongoing police investigation, the identity of a confidential informant, or some other particularly sensitive information.  It is not meant to be a catch-all, however, nor does it give the agency discretion to pick and choose what information it wants to release.  The agency must be able to justify its withholding of information under this exception.  If you don't get the police report you ask for, though, this is probably the reason.