Another victory for open government!

Today, Judge Phillip Shepherd again rejected the efforts of a state agency, this time the Cabinet for Health and Family Services, to deny the public's right to know "if the internal investigation [into allegations of sexual harassment leveled by a Cabinet official against a colleague, who held a supervisory position] was thorough, unbiased, and competent or whether it was a 'cover-up' of misconduct based on personal or political favoritism."

Judge Shepherd was not persuaded by the Cabinet's argument that the details of the investigation, including the identity of the alleged perpetrator, were properly withheld because its own internal investigation concluded that the allegations were unsubstantiated.

He wrote: "Through disclosure of complaints and investigation materials, the public can discern whether a publicly funded state agency effectively investigates and addresses the misconduct of its employees.This sheds light on the behavior of government employees, as well as the efficiency and productivity of our state workplaces. Perhaps more importantly, it ensures that such investigations are handled competently and without favoritism."

Judge Shepherd awarded attorneys' fees to the appellee in the case, the Courier Journal, sending another strong message that willful nondisclosure of public records will not be tolerated in this state.

This is the second time in two weeks he has done so. Last week, Judge Shepherd awarded the Kentucky Center for Investigative Reporting attorneys' fees in a case involving the Kentucky Labor Cabinet's attempts to shield the identity of an employee against whom allegations of sexual harassment were dropped, without investigation or action, after he advised the Cabinet he had taken a job elsewhere in state government.

Is the Cabinet likely to appeal this case to the Court of Appeals? If history (along with unbridled arrogance and obstinency) are any indicator, the answer is clearly "yes."