As secrecy is the eternal 'opponent of truth' and 'destroyer of freedom', I have transferred Roots of Law's entire chapter on this subject.  You can have secrecy or freedom; you can't have both.


III.L.0.0 It is declared illegal for there to be any secrecy not of an individual nature, exclusive one-to-one nature, or close family [blood relative to second cousin inclusive, or custodially (see: VIII.L.25.0) adopted relative of the same degree] nature; and this is to be concerning all actions taken and/or agreements or understandings reached [whether in writing or not] that in any way effect or concern others besides said individual, exclusive one-to-one other, or close family – in commerce, security [including the military in all of its affairs, with the one possible (depending on mutual agreement or lack thereof) exception of actual present-time site-locations of movable vehicles and/or personnel], education, government, science & research, law, health care, sports, elections, and in any other areas in which there is any public [i.e., other private individuals, or the official State] involvement.

III.L.0.1 By illegal is meant that, as a normal course of personal conduct, one is to make available to the public at large all above-specified “actions taken and agreements or understandings reached [whether in writing or not] that in any way effect or concern others besides oneself, a one-to-one exclusive interaction with one non-family other person, or one’s close family”; and including the making of it available even if it seems to also effect only one other party [for example, in adultery] besides oneself, an exclusive one-to-one other individual, or one’s close family; failure to so act means that one is to be held in violation of the law on a standing de facto basis and prosecutable until correction is made [and assuming that there is not an even greater violation involved, such as implementation of a conspiracy to defraud, or obstruction of justice, or deprivation of anyone’s RIGHTS including those of education & information or etc.].

III.L.1.0 It should be emphasized that not only is there a permanent standing legal requirement for disclosures [i.e., made publicly available in a practical and accessible manner] of non-individual or non-one-to-one or non-close family matters concerning any other private individuals or groups, but there is an especially emphatic standing legal requirement for this as it involves any official State group or agency or institution [whether as object of the secrecy, or as participant in the secrecy].

III.L.1.1 Violation in these cases can bring not only rebuke and calls for disclosure [with fines for contempt if delayed], but also loss of public office [if non-elective], demotion, suspension or canceling of contract, immediate fines for damages and inefficiencies already suffered, etc..

III.L.2.0 Regarding the imposition of fines for major violations of this standing legal requirement for disclosures, or for contempt due to delay in complying with a specific court directive for disclosure, the fines are to be proportional to the harm done or to the endangerment possible to the public – or to some third party – due to the withholding of the secret involved, and this evaluation is to be made by a Grand Jury/full trial arrangement [most especially for the amount of the fine, rather than as to the fact of one since the latter is virtually a certainty in such cases].

III.L.3.0 The destruction, or even hiding, of records required by the public for the conduction of its affairs, constitutes theft and fraud on an almost automatic basis.

III.L.4.0 Since news reporting is essential for informed citizenry, any prosecution brought against a reporter [one involved in searching out information (not just for his own use) for the consistent publication – print or non-print – of that information to the general public (not just for restricted dissemination of use)] for non-disclosure of sources is to be treated by Grand Jury as, at most, calling for fine at one-tenth the level as would apply to any non-reporter of news for the same adjudged degree of damage [depriving the voter of important information is to deprive the voter of their right to vote].


III.X.0.0 As it is the nature of all evil and the violating of all RIGHTS to be springing from darkness and conspiracy and an attempt for rigged advantage, then to assure the protection of all RIGHTS, it is vital that there be an eternal and no-exception [like so-called “emergency situations” and self-serving “counterbalances to others’ actions” and similar distortions, twisting of truth, outright lies, and assorted lame excuses for perpetrating the propagation of doubts, distrusts, ignorance, darkness, forfeitures of responsibility, and other evils] enforced policy of the elimination of all secrecy [the well-spring of lies & hatreds] that involves other than the individual himself, his close family, or his one-to-one exclusive interaction with one other person.

III.X.0.1 Please note that this tenet has very little to do with confidentiality of reporting sources because what is involved is the information and its relevance to others, and not who happened to be a conduit for the information; a reporter may have to divulge more than he might prefer of some given information on a news story with which he is involved, but it would never directly require his divulgence of his sources [the only involvement of sources would be if more information is clearly seen as still being withheld, in which case the reporter’s first line of response would be to attempt to obtain that further information, or to devise an avenue of investigation for the State to follow that would likely lead it to its own procurement of that data; only in extreme cases and at extreme ends of roads of all other inquiry might a reporter then be required to divulge a source, and in this type of case, and in view of III.L.4.0, it seems unlikely that a Grand Jury/trial procedure would result in the imposition of anything other than a nominal fine (hereby ordered to be maximum of one-tenth yearly income average over previous five years) for refusal to divulge a source].

III.X.1.0 For its part, the Government of the Nomocracy of VerVivo is to have the policy of making all official data, including minutes [or notarized summaries where minutes are not kept] of all meetings available “at cost” to all those desiring a copy.

III.X.2.0 Governments at all levels are responsible to assure security & availability of public kiosks where all newspapers and magazines and other news print material [non-book format and at least partly (over 10% of non-ad pages) non-fiction] are to be allowed to be available for sale or distribution to the public; one kiosk area per ten thousand [10,000] local population.

III.X.2.1 No interference or restriction, apart from ordering for maximum use, is allowed regarding any communication form.