The Statute of Secrecy

[Ken Hutchinson]

No: HPFGUIDX 159040

> Carol responds:
> Sorry to snip the rest of your post, but I just want to point out that
> there's no forged document, only a spell on a piece of paper that
> causes Mrs. Cole to see what she thinks should be there for the
> documents to be in order. There's really no other way that I can see
> for Dumbledore to get Tom to Hogwarts, where he has to be so he can
> learn to control his magic, especially if there's evidence that he's
> been using it to abuse other children. Since DD has no choice but to
> prevent Mrs. Cole from knowing the truth (I see no way that he could
> obtain genuine documents. Fudge isn't MoM yet, so there may not even
> be any communication between the MoM and the Muggle Prime Minister),
> and she probably wouldn't believe official documents authorizing Tom's
> attendance at the Hogwarts School for witchcraft and Wizardry, anyway,
> it seems to me that Dumbledore's "crime" here is pretty minor. In this
> case, whethe Dumbledore and JKR generally approve the principle or
> not, the end justifies the means.
> 
> No harm came to Mrs. Cole, and it was certainly for the good of the
> children in the orphanage to get Tom away from there for ten months of
> each year.
> 
> Carol, not trying to get into an OT philosophical discussion, only to
> state once again that DD in this instance had no choice (and could
> have been much more forceful if he were less respectful of Muggles
> than he is)
>

Ken:

Snipping my posts is not necessarily a bad thing. You would not
believe how many I have typed and then snipped in their entirety
before posting them. ;-)

As I said in another post I see no difference between using magic to
create the illusion that one has an official document and using pen
and ink to create the illusion that one has an official document. Both
are forgeries. The use of magic is immaterial and neither magnifies
nor diminishes the crime. You justify Dumbldore's decision by
presuming that he has to succeed. He does not have to succeed. The
Statute of Secrecy certainly does not force him to succeed, it forces
him to keep a secret. If Dumbldore fails then the Ministry has to deal
with the problems that result. If the Ministry has to deal with these
problems then it might take the matter up with the PM's office (if it
has not already). If people like Dumbledore deal with problems like
these on the sly as we seem to agree that he is doing, then the
problem is never brought to a legtimate resolution. Dumbledore's ad
hoc "solution" merely helps to perpetuate the problem. 

I see no reason that official documents for Hogwarts would have to
identify it as a school for wizards and witches. The documents only
have to identify it as a state accredited boarding school with the
financial standing to make the offer of a free education. For this
purpose it could simply be identified as Hogwarts Academy. The
University of Illinois is simply that, its name does not specifiy all
the fields of study that are taught there. 

Now there is a way to view this scene that allows Dumbledore to beat
the forgery rap which I have outlined in a previous post. It is not
canonical, and so far as I can tell I am the only one to mention it.
But then I usually can see both sides of an issue, I only argue the
side that is the most fun to defend. It is possible that Dumbledore
did have official sanction from both the state and Hogwarts and in
that case he did nothing wrong by conjuring the illusion of an
official document since Mrs Cole did not perceive that magic was being
used.

The Statute of Secrecy is a tough, tough law to enforce and obey, I
grant that. It does not *force* anyone to act unethically. Individual
witches and wizards and the Ministry collectively *choose* convenience
over ethics. I won't let them off the hook for that.   

Ken