TOPIC: Some people believe it is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Others believe that the public has a right to be fully informed.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
This topic raises the controversial issue of whether some information should be kept classified or the people should have access to all information that politicians have access to. Although the type of information kept classified varies state to state, it is a reality that every state has interest in keeping certain information classified. In the United States, information regarding national security or high technology is classified. Indeed, disclosing such information is treason against the state punished severely. At the same time, in the Saudi Arabia, the wealth of state officials is not open to public and disclosing such information would be considered treason.
Many would agree that keeping certain information classified is reasonable. This is because information regarding national security matters might be used against the state if fallen into enemy states or information regarding high technology can easily be stolen by other states or individuals costing the state that paid for the invention millions of dollars. In the United States, laws that concern disclosure of such sensitive information have a long history considering its experience of being subject to terrorist attacks and technology theft.
Having said that in the United States there are also certain information that the public has an interest in knowing such as the salary of top state officials. Therefore, American laws require the state to keep such information public. The reason behind such laws is mainly to prevent corruption. Disclosing wealth or salary might discourage a state official to make personal deals by manipulating his position which help reduce corruption. As mentioned above, unlike information that would harm the state if disclosed, revealing information that would benefit the state and the people should be open to public. This observation also proves itself right if we look at the case of the Saudi Arabian rulers. In Suadi Arabia, while considerable number of people are suffering from poverty, the Arabian rulers turn a blind eye on the corrupt state officials that require bribe even from the poor to do their job. Since their salary or wealth is not open to public we don’t even know the extent of the corruption in the state.
While states have interest in keeping certain information classified, information that the people have interest in knowing should be public.
