Re: Assemblies sworn to secrecy?

Some say that the agreement is needed to protect the faith from
lawsuits.  Has anyone ever heard of a Bahai' Institution losing a
lawsuit because of the lack of this agreement?   I haven't, although I
have noticed individuals restricting and channeling the flow of
information to maintain and enhance their personal administrative
power.

The wording of the agreement is interesting:

"The National Spiritual Assembly asks"  

--this is a request, not a requirement, and as presented it may be
declined without controversy.

"letter to a National"

--the excerpt from the House is incomplete, but it apparently can be
applied at the discretion of the individual National Assembly.  I have
not seen it in Panama yet, (although we didn't even have a cluster
here until last month).

"not to be divulged to any unauthorized person"

-- Since the wording is not ‘to anyone not named by the Assembly' the
agreement evidently leaves determining who is ‘authorized' up to the
individual's conscience.

The agreement is vague, probably not by design but by habit. 
Enforcement will depend on administrative consensus, not on agreement
wording.   What the agreement will do however is allow those in power
to cite yet one more ‘offense' by the accused.