Statute of Secrecy

[ariston3344]

No: HPFGUIDX 106907

I (Ariston) wrote:

> when Harry casts the Patronus in OotP to save himself and Dudley, 
> why does the MoM make a big deal about the fact that he did this
> in front of a Muggle (Dudley)?  This is mentioned in the letter
> he gets from the MoM, and Fudge even goes out of his way to
> emphasize this at the hearing.

To which Valky, Lee, and Tammy all replied (I'll paraphrase to save 
much quoting :-) that this was just one more way Fudge was trying to 
discredit Harry, and that it further demonstrates Fudge's corruption.

First, thanks for your kind welcome to the list!  Second, let me say 
that I guess all of you are right, that Fudge is just trying to 
discredit Harry in every way he can.  I suppose I was hoping for 
some deeper reason, since nobody in the books seems to have batted 
an eye at this extra, trumped-up charge.  But maybe Fudge's 
detractors on the Wizengamot knew enough to keep quiet until 
it was time to vote. :-)

Still, the secrecy charge lowers my opinion of Fudge  even further.  
Sure, he was power-hungry and out to "get Harry" (and Dumbledore), 
and he's also prejudiced and willfully blind... okay, 
sounds bad enough already, doesn't it?  But I never really thought 
of him as -- well, dim.  I assume that the Wizengamot is made up of 
intelligent witches and wizards who are very familiar with magical 
law.  The secrecy charge seems legally flawed, and so it's a real 
insult to the Wizengamot's intelligence to try to slide it past 
them.  (Unlike the underage charge, which turns on a question of 
fact: were there really Dementors in that street that night?)  But 
insulting the Wizengamot's intelligence doesn't seem to be a very 
strategic move on Fudge's part.

Well, giving the benefit of the doubt, maybe Fudge only knew that 
Dudley was a Muggle, not that he was part of Harry's immediate 
family.  But maybe Fudge's just not very smart.

Either way, here's hoping for a better Minister for Magic in HBP. :-)

-ariston