"If they had to declare their membership it would at least give more transparency and they wouldn’t be able to get away with nefarious behaviour quite so easily"
How?
It doesn't need to be a secret. Obviously they should be entitled to a private life but many wear rings anyway. I think the ignorance of many on here shows why they may not make a point of telling everyone they're Masons.
"Someone on this thread has admitted on a public forum someone they know had a reduced sentence due to Masonic connections."
I have 4 PhDs, live in a mansion and each one of my 12 DCs is exceptionally gifted and talented.
By the way, saying you know something followed by the "fact" doesn't make it so.
"is by the the very nature a conflict of interest if it’s kept secret"
No. Fact.
Either you misunderstand what a conflict of interest is or you misunderstand what a secret is. It is only a conflict of interest if you have a competing professional or personal interest. I judge would have to declare if they knew someone involved in a trial personally but not for being Masons in general. How about going to the same school but not knowing each other or supporting the same football team.
"But I think it has no place dominating police force/CPS."
Do you have any evidence it does? One anonymous poster doesn't prove "domination".
"Tell that to families who have had lives destroyed by police corruption stemming from freemasonry."
Are you the poster who clearly needed mental health support in the other thread. The one who said Masons had compiled a huge police record on her all of which was apparently falsified. Proper conspiracy theories that would have been laughable if her mental state wasn't so sad.