Unified Judicial System
POLICY 215. DATA ACCESS AND DISSEMINATION
A. Purpose
The intent of the North Dakota judicial system is to secure and safeguard computer-based information systems by establishing a policy governing judicial, public, criminal justice, law enforcement, and selected private agency access to trial court information stored electronically.
[Comment: Section A is not incorporated into the draft rule. The draft rule contains a wider ranging statement of purpose that seems to include the purpose identified in Section A.]
B. Statement of Authority and Intent
Under Article VI, Section 3, of the North Dakota Constitution, the Supreme Court has the authority to promulgate rules of procedure to be followed by all courts of the state. The Supreme Court has administrative responsibility over all courts of the state and may establish rules to exercise that authority as it deems necessary or desirable for the effective management of court records (27-02-05.1, NDCC).
[Comment: Section B is not incorporated in the draft rule because it is unnecessary in an administrative rule.]
C. Definitions
1."User" is an individual who has appropriately requested and received authorization to use the computer based information systems.
[Comment: Paragraph C1 is not incorporated in the draft rule because the draft rule's terminology is more specific. See Draft Rule Section 2.]
2. "Access" is the ability to view and print data stored within the information system and the supreme court administrative office will determine access level granted.
[Comment: Paragraph C2 is not incorporated in the draft rule because this definition is embraced by more specific draft rule provisions. See Draft Rule Section 3.]
3. "Public information" is information deemed public by appropriate administrative rules.
[Comment: Paragraph C3 is not incorporated in the draft rule because the draft rule uses the term "court record" instead.]
4. "Access Levels".
a. Level 1 Access (Typically Public Access).
1) Read-only access (no add, update, or delete capabilities).
2) All information accessed has been deemed "public information".
3) Information deemed confidential will not be printed or displayed.
b. Level 2 Access (Typically Law Enforcement).
1) Read-only access (no add, update, or delete capabilities).
2) All information accessed has been deemed "public information".
3) Access to open cases initiated by the law enforcement agency requesting access.
c. Level 3 Access (Typically State's Attorneys).
1) Read-only access (no add, update, or delete capabilities).
2) Access to all information deemed "public information".
3) Access to selected confidential record series information.
i) Paternity proceedings.
ii) Deferred impositions resulting in dismissal.
iii) Protection orders.
iv) Ability to view and print the judge's calendar.
v) Ability to view and print the contact card.
d. Level 4 Access (Typically Clerks of Court).
1) Add, update, and delete access to all information for their respective county.
2) Read only access (no add, update, or delete capabilities) for public information for other counties or districts.
e. Level 5 Access (Typically State Court Personnel).
1) Add, update, and delete access to all information for their respective district.
2) Read only access (no add, update, or delete capabilities) for public information for other counties or districts.
[Comment: Regulating access by "access level" does not seem consistent with the draft rule. Instead the approach taken by the draft rule is the divide records into those that can be accessed by everyone and those that are excluded from public access. Therefore, the access rules above that allow "public access" are not integrated into the draft rule -- the draft rule itself deals with public access in great detail. The access rules limiting public access to certain types of records are integrated into Subdivision 4(f) of the draft rule which deals with "Court Records Excluded From Public Access.]
D. Effect of Policy
This policy governs access to and dissemination of information stored electronically by or for the unified judicial system. Access to trial court information systems or data will only be granted according to this policy.
[Comment: Section D is not incorporated into the draft rule. The language of the draft rule, however, conveys the principle set out in Section D.]
E. Public Access to Computer Based Data and Information Systems
1. Electronic access to computer based data or information systems by non-government entities or individuals shall not be allowed, except as provided below.
[Comment: The principle set out in paragraph E1 is essentially opposite of the principle set out in the draft rule, which provides that all records are open unless stated otherwise.]
a. Reports specifically developed for electronic transfer approved by the state court administrator.
b. Terminals or computers for the public's access to court information systems will be allowed to access information which would otherwise be available.
2. Reports. Reports which are generated in the normal course of business are available if the report does not contain information which is confidential by law, court rule, or court order.
3. Special Reports. Special reports for non-court entities will not be produced except as directed by the state court administrator.
4. Records or documents that are stored electronically and are otherwise available to the public by law or court rule are available upon a specific request.
[Comment: Paragraphs E1a, E1b and E2 above are integrated into subdivision 4(b) of the draft rule. The essentials elements of these three paragraphs, and of paragraphs E3 and E4, which are not specifically integrated into the draft rule, also seem to be included within subdivision 4(d) of the draft rule -- Access to Compiled Information From Court Records.]
F. Criminal Justice, Law Enforcement, and Selected Private Agency Access to Computer Based Data and Information Systems
[Comment: This section of Policy 215 could be integrated into paragraph 4(f)(3) of the draft rule, but it would add even more length to a rule that is already quite long. The Committee may wish to consider whether this section should continue as a separate policy.]
1. Electronic access to computer based data and information systems by criminal justice agencies, law enforcement agencies, and private agencies providing probation extender services on contract with the judiciary will only be authorized according to the terms below.
a. An Online Access Request and Nondisclosure Agreement will be submitted by a public criminal justice agency, law enforcement agency, or appropriate private agency providing probation extender services to the state court administrator. The agency director/administrator shall attest that the data will be for legitimate organizational objectives only.
b. Upon receipt of Online Access Request and Nondisclosure Agreement, the state court administrator will circulate the request to the presiding judge and appropriate staff for comment prior to authorization being granted.
c. When granted, authorization will be in accordance with the terms listed in the Online Access Request and Nondisclosure Agreement.
d. All costs for computer hardware, communications, software, and personnel to support agency access to computer based data and information systems shall be the responsibility of the agency requesting access.
e. Multiple levels of access will be available.
1) Each level will allow access to different classes of information.
2) Each user will be granted access to only one level.
3) Access authorized will be determined by the state court administrator's office.
f. Agencies must list on the Online Access Request and Nondisclosure Agreement the name of each person requesting access.
1) Each person authorized access will be given a unique user identification code.
2) User identification codes are for a single individual and are not to be shared.
g. The Online Access Request and Nondisclosure Agreements will be maintained by the state court administrator's office.
2. Any authorized agency understands their access can be discontinued if the access adversely impacts the system performance to court users. If the information is used outside the scope of legitimate organizational objectives, access may be terminated immediately. A written notification will be provided to the agency director or administrator.
Approved by the Supreme Court 06/30/99