WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2219

RELATING TO DISCLOSURE OF ATTORNEY-CLIENT AND ATTORNEY WORK-PRODUCT PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATIONS TO THE OMBUDSMAN.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Cory Chun and 11 co-sponsors

HB 2219 allows Hawaii's Ombudsman to access attorney-client privileged communications and work-product, creating an exception to legal confidentiality protections in government matters.

Reported from LMG (Stand. Com. Rep. No. 610-26) as amended in HD 1, recommending passage on Second Reading and referral to JHA.
#agencycommunications #attorneywork-productprivilege #attorney-clientprivilege #disclosure
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2219

Legislative bill overview

HB 2219 would modify Hawaii law to permit the disclosure of attorney-client privileged communications and attorney work-product to the state Ombudsman. Currently, these communications are protected from disclosure under attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine. The bill creates an exception allowing the Ombudsman to access these materials, likely during investigations of government agencies and officials.

Why is this important

Attorney-client privilege is a foundational protection in the legal system that encourages honest communication between lawyers and clients. Carving out exceptions affects how government agencies can operate confidentially with their lawyers. This change could impact both the effectiveness of government counsel and the scope of the Ombudsman's investigative authority, raising questions about the balance between transparency and legal confidentiality.

Potential points of contention

  • Scope of privilege erosion: Creates precedent for other entities or officials to claim similar access to privileged communications, potentially weakening this fundamental protection across multiple contexts
  • Ombudsman's independence vs. attorney-client rights: While the Ombudsman serves a transparency function, unrestricted access to privileged materials may disadvantage government agencies' ability to receive confidential legal advice without fear of disclosure
  • Lack of specificity: The bill's current form doesn't clarify whether there are limits on what the Ombudsman can access, what they can do with the information, or whether it would apply retroactively to existing matters

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.