>information on why they are on it, for how long, and a clear process for challenging being incorrectly placed on the list.
If the answers are anything other than "they were convicted in a court of law by a jury of their peers," "for as long as the judge sentenced them to," and "by appealing to a higher court," then the only thing transparent about the list would be its transparent illegitimacy.
In fact, if people could see the reason they were on it, it would seem less legitimate, because "agent #78 thought you belonged on it and his boss signed off," would serve only to highlight what the justice system abdicated when it allowed it to be set up.
That's exactly what happened with student housing subsidies in NZ. Labour were elected and fulfilled a campaign promise by raising the housing allowance by $150 pw. Rents in Wellington rose $150 pw at the same time.
If the answers are anything other than "they were convicted in a court of law by a jury of their peers," "for as long as the judge sentenced them to," and "by appealing to a higher court," then the only thing transparent about the list would be its transparent illegitimacy.
In fact, if people could see the reason they were on it, it would seem less legitimate, because "agent #78 thought you belonged on it and his boss signed off," would serve only to highlight what the justice system abdicated when it allowed it to be set up.