I read through a lot of the material you pointed me toward months ago, and came to the conclusion that the Hawaii DOH was simply a bureaucratic mess. To me, two different wordings of the responses does not necessarily mean they destroyed records, but that the ship is not run very well over there. I’d need more evidence that the COLB was amended or records destroyed than what you’ve so far cited.
The PDF on the DOH site of rules was dated 1955, with amendment in 1961, and has handwritten notations on it - not my idea of a definitive current document. This contains the rule that allows anyone a noncertified COLB. The question we discussed last time was whether the 1961 rules were superceded by 338-18 from 2001. I’m no lawyer, but I’d bet that’s what the DOH would argue. 338-18 gives the director very wide latitude to decide what to release.
The DOH is a bureaucratic mess, no doubt.
But there is a reason that their Administrative Rules were deliberately hidden until a year after the election.
There is also a reason that their birth index book has removable pages, and that they have 2 different versions of the 1960-64 book (one with Obama’s name and one without). That’s not something that happened accidentally. That requires deliberate action on the part of somebody high in that office.
HRS 338-18(a) is the rule they say has superceded the Administrative Rules. But HRS 338-18(a) specifically states that the prohibition doesn’t apply to disclosures already allowed by the rest of HRS 338 or by Administrative Rules. The Ombudsman actually acknowledged that the HDOH had given the wrong reason for refusing me a non-certified abbreviated copy and said that I could sue them under UIPA. IOW, he told me that the law is on my side and dared me to sue. As if I think a Hawaiian judge would side with the law. The Ombudsman refused to say whether he would let the HDOH know that the reason they gave doesn’t apply and that the UIPA law sided with me.
Also, just a factual correction. The rules which allow a non-certified abbreviated BC to be released to anyone went into effect in 1976. It is the latest version of Administrative Rules there are and the HDOH has confirmed that those are the rules that are in effect, as nothing has been even proposed to replace those rules.
We spent a LONG TIME just getting the HDOH to say whether those are the rules in effect, as well as much time and effort trying to see PHR Chapter 8 on our own. The Hawaii libraries wouldn’t give it out and it wasn’t to be found anywhere. The HDOH refused to respond to UIPA requests for the document or to answer phone calls, forward phone messages, or respond in any way to the requests for what was required to be public on the website at all times.
It was only finally made public on the web shortly after I contacted the Lieutenant Governor to ask who is reponsible to make sure that the departments’ administrative rules are posted publicly as required by law. (HI law says it’s the lieutenant governor). They responded that the Lieut Gov is only responsible to see that the proposed AMENDMENTS to the rules are posted online, but a couple days later the HDOH Administrative Rules appeared online via the Lieut Gov’s website. After months of hassle.
That is WAY, WAY beyond bureaucratic inefficiency. That is deliberate obfuscation and violation of the law.
And there is a reason for it. Of that you can be sure.