African Journalist Wins the Right to FOIA Discovery From U.S. Army
January 2, 2007
Lawrence R. "Larry" Liebesman- Washington
Christopher Nugent - Washington
In a rare decision, a U.S. District Court in Washington D.C. has stayed
summary judgment proceedings and permitted discovery in a Freedom of Information
Act case.
The FOIA action resulted from the false arrest of a freelance African
journalist by the Military Police at a U.S. State Department credit union in
Washington. The journalist, Alseny Ben Bangoura, believes that he was the
subject of racial profiling. His companion at the time of the arrest overheard
the credit union staff remark that “two Muslim-looking men are acting
suspiciously.” Bangoura is a citizen of the Republic of Guinea in West Africa.
Bangoura was never charged, but he was held for over four hours under
interrogation by military police. Bangoura’s employer, the Office of Broadcast
Reports, a component of the U.S. State Department, subsequently apologized for
his arrest.
Bangoura filed a FOIA action seeking any and all documents related to his
arrest, following the government’s failure to respond to a letter request for
six months. The government finally began its search after the litigation was
filed, but what came next raised more questions than answers – as described in
his pleadings, the government response was like a “trail of breadcrumbs, leading
nowhere.” Several times in nearly two years of litigation, the government
provided a small amount of records with a response representing that “no further
documents exist.”
Following one of these responses, Bangoura’s counsel sent a letter seeking
records of his allegedly fraudulent checks, which were the subject of his
arrest, and other documentation. The government sent some documents and again
represented that their production was complete. Bangoura’s counsel corresponded
with the government again asking why some basic military forms typically
associated with arrests like these had not been provided. As a result, the
government located and provided those forms.
Adding further complications, when Bangoura received documents from the
government they were heavily redacted, with no corresponding Vaughan
index, the privilege log that the law requires the government to furnish with
redacted records. Thus, Bangoura was left to contest privilege with no means to
do so.
After certifying that it had finally and fully responded to the FOIA request,
the government moved for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the litigation.
Faced with responding to summary judgment, Bangoura moved to stay the
proceedings and conduct discovery. Discovery is almost never allowed in FOIA
litigation, and the party seeking discovery has to meet a high burden.
In his motion, Bangoura acknowledged that FOIA discovery was “rare,” but
where the government (1) exhibits bad faith, or (2) fails to meet its burden of
a good faith search reasonably calculated to reveal documents relevant to the
FOIA request, discovery is appropriate.
Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson in her December 8, 2006, order found
that the facts in this case merit discovery as the government has not shown that
it searched “in all locations likely to contain documents responsive to the FOIA
request.” Robinson did not rule upon whether the government’s actions amounted
to bad faith.
In particular, Robinson found the following facts persuasive:
• Government FOIA professionals stated their knowledge of standard search
procedures without stating what those procedures would be in a similar case.
• Duplicative searches were conducted with dissimilar results and no
explanation was provided.
• The government found documents after telling the plaintiff that “no
further documents exist,” again, without any explanation.
The ruling permits limited discovery of 10 interrogatories and one
deposition. After discovery, Bangoura will defend against summary judgment.
Because discovery in these cases is so rare, this ruling provides helpful
precedent for future FOIA battles.
Holland & Knight represents journalist Alseny Ben Bangoura in this matter.
For more information, e-mail Lawrence R. Liebesman at
lawrence.liebesman@hklaw.com,
Christopher Nugent at
christopher.nugent@hklaw.com, or Amy S. Mushahwar at
amy.mushahwar@hklaw.com, or call
toll free, 1-888-688-8500.
Related Practices