Secrecy Statutes/Information Alabama
HB 379 , introduced in February 2014, would amend Sec. 15-18-82.1 to add: (j) The name, address, qualifications, and other identifying information of any person or entity that manufactures, compounds, prescribes, dispenses, supplies, or administers the drugs or supplies utilized in an execution shall be confidential, shall not be subject to disclosure, and shall not be admissible as evidence or discoverable in any action of any kind in any court or before any tribunal, board, agency, or person. The same confidentiality and protections shall also apply to any person who participates in an execution or performs any ancillary function related to an execution and shall include information contained in any departmental records, including electronic records, that would identify the person.
The Method of Execution Act of 2009, Arkansas Code 5-4-617:
(B) The policies and procedures for carrying out the sentence of death and any and all matters related to the policies and procedures for the sentence of death are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act of 1967, § 25-19-101 et seq., except for the choice of chemical or chemicals that may be injected, including the quantity, method, and order of the administration of the chemical or chemicals. February 14, 2014, Arkansas state trial court invalidated the MEA based on the state constitutional separation of powers provision.
August 1, 2013, in
ACLU v. Colorado Department of Corrections
, the state district court ordered disclosure of the execution protocol, but permitted the department to withhold information about the attempts to purchase drugs. This was based on public records law. The court stated:
The Plaintiff argues that the public has an interest in knowing whether Colorado pharmacies are supplying drugs that will be used in executions and who the pharmacies are. The public may have an interest in knowing who the pharmacies are and if they are supplying the drugs for executions; however, knowledge of the source of the drugs used will not facilitate Colorado's public discussion about the death penalty. Even if it did, releasing the information could possibly expose the pharmacy and its employee to ridicule, raise safety concerns and possibly have a negative impact on its business, which far outweighs the public need for the information. The Records Custodian properly denied the request for information pertaining to the source of lethal injection chemicals. Further, the disclosure of any