Classifying Secrecy – How State Secrecy is Justified and Contested

Transparency research primarily focusses on freedom of information laws and open governance programs. Discussions on state secrecy have in consequence been approached from the perspective that – while confidentiality might... [ view full abstract ]

Transparency research primarily focusses on freedom of information laws and open governance programs. Discussions on state secrecy have in consequence been approached from the perspective that – while confidentiality might be relevant to some processes or policy areas – it primarily represents an exemption from the norm of disclosure and accessibility of public affairs. Non-disclosure hence requires justification to withstand. This paper takes up the logic of secrecy justification and thus proposes to move beyond the understanding of secrecy as a ‘necessary evil’.

The analysis engages with the rationales for state secrecy to be found in non-disclosure justifications. We will take a comparative approach based on the consideration that conceptions of legitimate secrecy possibly differ between political systems. So far, there is however little empirical research contrasting forms of legal secrecy.

Specifically, the paper will engage in a comparative category analysis of classification system in US, Canada, the United Kingdom and Germany to understand the way in which bureaucracies define, construct and implement documentary state secrecy. Classification systems have a twofold function: (1) they manage to specify positions which can or ought to have access to sensitive information. (2) They outline the nature of harm caused by information disclosure – or respectively sensitivities of certain information that should thus have limits to their circulation. Category analysis as a type of interpretive methods allows us to examine the conceptual basis on which document management is based and get to the tacit knowledge underlying classification.

This paper analyses the classification wording, the type of risk that disclosure represents in each level and the organizing principle by which documents are classified on a specific level. In a second step, we compare and contrast classification categories across case countries to identify convergences and divergences in classification rationales. What constitutes “Top Secret” information in different contexts and how is their non-disclosure being managed? Apart from specific classification systems, the analysis will be based classification guidelines and regulations for each case country.

__________________

The contribution is part of a larger research project that investigates conceptualizations, justifications and contestations of national security secrecy in different administrative systems. The analysis of classification logics constitutes an important building block of the wider analysis of national security secrecy, since security considerations are a key motive why classification systems exist in the first place (Aftergood, 2009). Indeed, “the purpose of the classification system is traditionally to prevent disclosure of information that could damage (national) security” (Curtin, 2014).

References
Aftergood, S. (2009) Reducing Government Secrecy: Finding What Works, Yale Law and Policy Review, 27.
Curtin, D. (2014) Overseeing Secrets in the EU. A Democratic Perspective, Journal of Common Market Studies, 52: 3.