• A citizen wants to know how much money has been awarded to sexual assault victims in the state.

• The IRS seeks information on lawsuits brought in Washington by certain named individuals.

• A collection agency desires names and addresses of those who failed to pay small claims judgments.

The first two requests were approved, and the third denied. These are the kinds of judgments and policies that come under the oversight of Washington's Judicial Information System Committee (JISC).

The 16-member JISC was created by the Supreme Court 23 years ago to administer the computer database that serves nearly all the state's 200-plus district, municipal, superior, and appellate courts.

In 1999, the committee held its first public hearing to survey the public and judiciary to refine its Data Dissemination Policy as it endeavors to keep abreast of rapid advancements in information technology.

The JISC bases its policy decisions on a number of factors:

• State statutes, including protections for traditionally confidential records as well as Washington RCW 2.68.050, which governs electronic access to judicial information.

• Relevant case law, such as the leading U.S. Supreme Court opinion on compiled records.

• The state constitutional requirement that "Justice in all cases shall be administered openly, and without unnecessary delay."

LEGITIMATE PUBLIC ACCESS

Current policies allow anyone access to information about a specific case-unless sealed by a judge, or if state law makes the record confidential, as in adoption cases. This includes the names of the parties involved and their relationships to the case, the cause of action or criminal charge, case number, and outcome of the case.

CERTAIN INFO OFF-LIMITS

Requests for computer information from OAC continue to rise. Last year, OAC received nearly one hundred data dissemination requests from organizations, public agencies, and the general public. Many other requests went directly to the state's trial courts.

Since 1995 about 5% of requests have been denied, some because the information requested is not held by court sources, others because the requests would invade privacy and/or be used for commercial purposes.

Personal information-such as social security numbers, phone numbers, and other personal identifying information of witnesses, jurors, and litigants-is off-limits to general access. Also off-limits is "compiled" information, such as all cases filed by or against a certain individual or across all levels of court.

DIFFICULT BALANCING ACT

Advancements in information technology, coupled with mandates from the Legislature, make storage and dissemination of information more complicated than ever before. For example, the courts are mandated by the Legislature to compile all family proceedings involving an individual, but are also charged with protecting the privacy of that information.

Further adding to the debate, is the increasingly sophisticated and specific nature of information gathered by the courts. The JISC is currently working on a revised policy to balance the privacy of individuals, the courts' need to conduct business openly, and the public's right to know how the courts do their jobs.