In New Mexico, politicians and public servants are allowed to redact public records. Among the records they are allowed to redact are the public records of their own public service.
Simultaneously with their self- redaction, comes an appearance of conflicted interests. Did the politician or public self- redact their record
- in the spirit of the law; in the best interests of the people, or
- in order to forestall their own accountability for some yet to be exposed incompetence or corruption?
If self-redaction is not malfeasance;
the commission of an act that is unequivocally illegalthen surely, self-redaction must be nonfeasance;
or completely wrongful
the failure to act; especially failure to do
what ought to be done*;*having the redaction done by someone whose interests aren't conflicted; someone who will redact the record "in the spirit of the law" and in the people's interests.
They act like deliberately creating an appearance of conflicted interests is alright just because it's "legal"*.
*Not even legal actually; rather; "manageable" by means of
their legal weaselry and unlimited budgets for litigation even against the public interests.
Adding insult to injury, not a one of them to can be compelled to defend, deny, explain or even acknowledge the appearances of conflicted interests that they create.
Who else gets to redact their own record? Do tax payers?
How about some leadership from some organization,
association or foundation with a stated interest in
governmental accountability by means of transparency?