Case Studies

Abstract

Abstract This chapter argues that opacity falls on a spectrum: there will be some cases in which opacity is justified and some cases in which opacity is closer to the fraudulent end of a transparency spectrum. Likewise, pursuing security through opaque policing can be closer to the fraudulent end of the transparency spectrum. In democratic societies, it is implausible to think the public can reasonably trust that rights will be respected honestly if the state’s pursuit of security is opaque. On the other hand, it is also implausible to think the state can provide security (especially “national security”) without opacity. This chapter seeks a pragmatic compromise: transparency regarding things such as investigatory evidence (“substantive transparency”) is not always justified, but transparency regarding procedures and processes by which state institutions wield their power (“procedural transparency”) is much more likely to be justified given democratic goals of accountability, authority, and legitimacy.