While transparency has become the constant refrain of democratic politics, executive branch officials consistently seek to insulate their activities from public scrutiny. A recurrent rationale asserts the necessity of secrecy in governance. One narrative presents secrecy as ensuring the integrity of decision-making processes. Thus, when the UK government refused to disclose Cabinet minutes in which military action in Iraq was deliberated, it claimed that secrecy was necessary to ensure effective Cabinet government. In the Statement of Reasons declining the request for disclosure from the Iraq Inquiry Committee, the Attorney General argued: “Conventions on Cabinet confidentiality are of the greatest pertinence when the issues at hand are of the greatest sensitivity. (…) Ministers must have the confidence to challenge each other in private. (…) Disclosure (…) has the potential to (…) compromise the integrity of this thinking space where it is most needed.” Likewise, secrecy is an emergency measure employed for the political survival of the state, i.e., national security. For instance, this logic underpinned the Polish government’s refusal to confirm/deny the existence of CIA black …