Wouldn’t that raise significant suspicions in your mind? Wouldn’t you want to know exactly what was going on at each and every one of those facilities? And if you were denied that information, as well as the names and addresses of the locations, wouldn’t you infer the secrecy was covering up something harmful to you? And suppose you were told that the permanent facilities of that corporation in your region were located at secret sites. Suppose, in your city, in your region, a major corporation was carrying out, on a regular basis, experiments with new, non-commercial, toxic pesticide chemicals and genetically altered organic materials. You mean the addresses and names of Monsanto stations and growing fields on Maui are a secret? It’s not much of a stretch to infer those 14 lines are blacked out to conceal Maui locations of Monsanto facilities. Certain specific locations on Maui are uniquely suitable to multi-season/cycle breeding and research.” The next 14 lines of the section are blacked out. One section (no.7) states: “…Monsanto currently owns or leases approximately 784 acres of farmland on the island. Is this what we’re dealing with here? Monsanto’s concerns have become, in a federal court, a matter of national security?īelow, you will see a link to one such redacted Monsanto document. In those instances, documents are either excluded as evidence, or only redacted versions are allowed in. This echoes of cases where prosecutors claim “national security” as an issue.
Judge Mollway, who will decide the case, can read everything Monsanto offers in its defense, but the lawyers against Monsanto have no full access and, therefore, can’t argue their side from full knowledge. They can only read redacted versions of Monsanto making its case for continued GMO/pesticide experiments on Maui-contravening the demands of Maui voters. That means the lawyers for the voters of Maui can’t see those Monsanto documents. Accordingly, the subject declarations shall be filed by the Court under seal, and redacted versions may be filed with the Plaintiffs’ Motion.’” ‘ IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ ex parte application is GRANTED. “ ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION TO FILE UNDER SEAL IN PART THE DECLARATIONS OF SAM EATHINGTON, JESSE STIEFEL, AND ADOLPH HELM IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION re 13- Signed by Judge BARRY M. Monsanto requested the court make the documents secret, and the previous Judge, Barry Kurren, agreed to it. I’ve just learned that Monsanto filed documents “under seal,” to make its case in the proceeding now before Federal Judge Susan Oki Mollway.
The case is now hung up in Federal Court.
Last Election Day, the people of Maui County voted to halt all local GMO and pesticide experimentation being carried out by Monsanto and Dow.ĭuring the temporary halt, a complete independent investigation would be done, to find out exactly how harmful the pesticides and GMOs were.īut the legal and binding vote was suspended, because Monsanto and Dow immediately sued. (The link to the document is located at the bottom of this article.) Your opponents, of course, know every word of those documents.
I can only give you access to heavily redacted versions. I can’t allow you to read the documents. These documents are at the heart of their argument. The judge tells you, “Look, the other side, your opponents in this case, have filed documents with me. Imagine you are a lawyer arguing a case before a judge.