Scratch that. In regards to standing, I am absolutely correct.
No, you aren’t. *snicker*
http://hawaii.gov/oip/guidancefaqs.html#whataretheindividualsrights
“Scratch that. In regards to standing, I am absolutely correct.”
Sucks to be a loser named “El Sardo.”
Did you notice that in the article the attorney they quote is Jeff Portnay - the Advertiser’s own attorney?
I wonder what any other attorney would say if they realized that the requests are for the non-certified abbreviated birth certificate - which is required to be released to anybody who asks for it, according to Administrative Rules and UIPA.
There is no concern over identity theft from a non-certified document. That’s why anybody can get it. That’s why the DOH Director can allow any INFORMATION from the certificate to be released as index data. The only reason to protect the birth certificate itself - even though it has no social security number or information that could be used to access a person’s finances, etc - is to keep people from having the CERTIFYING elements. Because a document is only legally-admissible if it has those certifying elements.
The DOH has been feeding us a load of crap all along on this. The OIP has ruled that gender and address are the 2 items from a BC that hold a privacy interest. But yet those are supposedly the very items that were released by the DOH in the birth announcements. Go figure. This whole thing is just a boatload of crap. They know it, and soon everybody else will also.