Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee debates transparency and oversight in House Bill 525 on execution-procedure confidentiality
Summary
House Bill 525 would extend confidentiality protections for the development of execution procedures and exempt those development activities from rulemaking and judicial review, the Department of Correction director and sponsor said. Committee members pressed for clearer drafting to ensure only the development phase — not final procedures — is exempt and expressed concern about transparency when constitutional rights are at stake.
Representative Bruce Skog (District 10) sponsored House Bill 525, which would extend confidentiality protections to persons and entities involved in planning, training and carrying out executions, and clarify that protocols developed by the director are not subject to rulemaking or judicial review under the Idaho Administrative Procedures Act. "This proposed legislation extends the confidentiality protections currently afforded to persons or entities involved in the executions for the planning, the training, the performance...," the sponsor said.
Representative Rubel pressed the sponsor and the Department of Correction on whether the language would remove any opportunity for legislative or judicial oversight, asking whether the bill "would mean that there is effectively no legislative oversight or opportunity for discovery into procedures..." Derek Bridal, director of the Idaho Department of Correction, said the department intends the exemption to apply to the development phase only and that the department's execution standard operating procedures are publicly available after they are created. "The procedures after they are created are all public," Bridal told the committee, adding that execution procedures are often the subject of litigation.
Several members raised constitutional concerns. Representative Rubel argued, "when the state is taking the life of a person, that is a time for more transparency, not less," and urged holding the bill pending clearer drafting. Representative Ehart proposed an amended substitute to hold HB525 in committee until no later than Feb. 11 to allow time for clarifying language. Ultimately Representative Gannon moved to send HB525 to General Orders so the drafting could be clarified; the motion carried by voice vote.
