Rethinking the secrecy-exposure-accountability model

• In Event: 3554 - States and Political Power

Abstract

While the phenomenon of secrecy, and particularly state secrecy, has been gaining increasing attention in the study of politics, this article turns its attention to secrecy’s relatively overlooked counterpart: exposure. Insofar as secrecy is seen as a problem- impeding democracy accountability- transparency and exposure are frequently understood to be the solution. But this “solution” rests upon a flawed understanding of how secrecy, exposure, and transparency relate. Understandings of secrecy and exposure, both in academic work and in practical politics, are often modelled upon a (generally implicit) understanding of the relationship between secrecy, exposure, and accountability, which I term the “secrecy-exposure-accountability narrative.” This encompasses a particular theory of knowledge and politics, which presumes that when secrecy is disrupted by exposure, this then leads straightforwardly to (democratic) accountability. The difficulty, as I show in this article, is that this sequence can no longer be assumed to flow as presumed (if it ever did). I illustrate this with a case study of the exposures of the use of torture in the post 9/11 war on terror. While violations have been repeatedly exposed, these exposures have failed to result in accountability, and even the opposite: a spreading defense and justification of torture and human rights violations.

Author

• Lisa Stampnitzky, University of Sheffield