We, the undersigned, formally petition Congress to establish full, permanent transparency in all proceedings related to the Epstein investigation and any connected inquiries.

This petition is not about specific individuals.

It is not about political parties.

It is about power, accountability, and ending institutional secrecy.

For decades, powerful individuals across governments, institutions, and borders have avoided public scrutiny through closed proceedings, sealed records, and selective disclosure.

THAT ERA MUST END. 

The Epstein network involved international victims, cross-border activity, and individuals in positions of extraordinary power. The response must therefore meet the highest possible standard of public accountability. Accordingly, we demand the following standards be applied universally and without exception:

1. ALL PROCEEDINGS MUST BE PUBLIC

All questioning, testimony, hearings, interviews, and investigative proceedings related to the Epstein investigation must be conducted as public hearings

Closed-door sessions, private interviews, recorded depositions, or sealed proceedings are unacceptable.

Transparency must be the rule, not a discretionary choice. 

2. ALL TESTIMONY MUST BE UNDER OATH

Every individual questioned, regardless of status, wealth, office, or influence, must testify under oath. 

No special accommodations.

No informal processes.

No unequal standards. 

3. LIVE ACCESS AND COMPLETE RECORDS

All proceedings must be:

Open to the public Broadcast live

Preserved and released in full Summaries, excerpts, or selectively released materials are insufficient.

Full context is required for legitimacy.

4. TRANSPARENCY REGARDING VICTIMS’ TESTIMONY

While protecting victim safety and privacy is essential,

Congress must disclose:

The subject matter addressed

The categories of questions asked

Clear and specific explanations for any redactions or withheld material

Silence and vague references are not transparency. 

5. FULL DISCLOSURE OF INVESTIGATIVE SCOPE

The public must be informed of: 

The scope and purpose of questioning.

The investigative objectives 

Whether mechanisms exist for victim-submitted or public-submitted questions

If such mechanisms do not exist, Congress must explain why. 

6. REDACTIONS REQUIRE EXPLANATION

Redactions are appropriate only to protect victims, survivors, and narrowly defined sensitive information;

they must not be used to shield alleged perpetrators, facilitators, or individuals in positions of power from public accountability. 

When names or identifying information of individuals in positions of power are redacted, the legal basis must be clearly stated. When documents reference abuse or conduct involving minors, unexplained redactions are unacceptable.

The public has the right to know why names are protected and under what authority. 

7. REJECTION OF “MOVE ON” NARRATIVES

Calls to “move on” are inappropriate in matters involving systemic abuse, institutional failure, and decades of concealment.  8. FAIR,

8. SUBSTANTIVE QUESTIONING WITHOUT PERFORMATIVE PRAISE 

All questioning must be conducted in a serious, professional manner focused on fact-finding and accountability.

Proceedings MUST NOT include PERFORMATIVE PRAISE, commendations, or character statements directed at witnesses for actions they are legally or ethically obligated to perform. 

Testifying under oath and answering questions is not an act of service or goodwill.

It is a civic and legal responsibility.

Congressional oversight MUST prioritize rigorous, fair, and honest questioning on behalf of the public, not image management for witnesses.

9. SURVIVOR PRESENCE, PARTICIPATION, AND THE RIGHT TO BE HEARD

Survivors must be permitted to attend public hearings related to the Epstein investigation.

Where survivors choose to do so, Congress must allow appropriate, structured opportunities for survivors to:

Submit evidence 

Provide statements 

Respond to testimony that directly contradicts their lived experience

Survivor participation must be conducted with dignity, trauma-informed safeguards, and respect for personal choice. 

Silencing survivors while allowing powerful witnesses to testify without challenge undermines the integrity of the process and retraumatizes those harmed.

Truth-seeking requires that those most affected are not excluded from the record.

This does not mean disorder.

It means balance.

It means reality is allowed in the room.

WHY THIS PETITION IS NECESSARY

This is not a partisan dispute. It is a power struggle between secrecy and accountability. When proceedings occur behind closed doors, governance becomes indistinguishable from complicity. 

If these demands are ignored, the public will reasonably conclude that institutional self-protection is being prioritized over justice, regardless of party or position.

FINAL STATEMENT

The legitimacy of this investigation depends on its openness.

Closed processes erode trust and compromise accountability.

Transparency is a requirement of governance, not a courtesy.

When institutions choose secrecy over transparency, the public is left to draw its own conclusions.

Accountability requires openness. 

Closed-door sessions, private interviews, recorded depositions, or sealed proceedings are unacceptable.

Transparency must be the rule, not a discretionary choice.