A state task force has issued a report to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court recommending several changes to the investigating grand jury system, including regarding several key confidentiality issues that have recently come before the justices.

The 81-page report details 37 recommendations to the court made by the task force formed in 2017 charged with preparing a public report offering proposals for possible reform.

“The grand jury is an institution with deep historical roots, facilitating confidential inquiries into alleged criminal activities while also ensuring certain protections for both the subjects of investigation and witnesses who are called to testify,” Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas G. Saylor said in an Administrative Office of Pennsylvania Courts statement issued Friday. “The court deeply appreciates the dedication and commitment of the task force members and looks forward to a review of the recommendations for change within the judicial system.”

The task force suggested in its report several changes geared toward the consideration of the General Assembly, including the elimination of grand jury reports, along with creating a new process by which Pennsylvania’s more sparsely populated counties could pool resources to impanel grand juries they could use collectively.

The task force also tackled a number of issues that have recently been litigated in the state Supreme Court.

For one, the task force recommended that lawyers representing witnesses should not be sworn to secrecy simply by filling out attorney appearance forms and instead should be separately administered an oath by the supervising judge, typically just before the attorney’s witness testifies.

A split Supreme Court ruled in August 2018 in In re Fortieth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury that the appearance forms are overbroad and invited the task force to recommended additional modifications.

The task force also suggested that trial judges, not supervising judges, should control the release of grand jury material in a case.

In addition, again citing Fortieth Statewide Investigating Grand Jury, the task force offered a proposed definition of “testimony before the investigating grand jury” as used in 42 Pa.C.S. Section 4549(d), for the purposes of clarifying what witnesses and their attorneys may or may not disclose.

Under the proposed definition, “testimony before the investigating grand jury” would include “questions the witness is asked, the responses of the witness, and documents or tangible items the witness is shown in the course of his or her testimony.”

The members of the task force include Judge Anthony M. Mariani (chairman) of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas; President Judge George N. Zanic of the Huntingdon County Court of Common Pleas; Sal Cognetti Jr. of Cognetti & Cimini in Scranton; Linda Dale Hoffa of Dilworth Paxson in Philadelphia; Ronald Eisenberg of the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office; Thomas J. Farrell of Farrell Reisinger & Comber in Pittsburgh; and Associate Dean Wesley M. Oliver of the Duquesne University School of Law in Pittsburgh.