When one party secretly tapes a conversation, he or she has an unfair advantage in any after the fact review of that conversation.
How on God's green earth does a recording of a conversation provide any advantage to one party or the other in an "after-the-fact review"? Most court proceedings these days are recorded. Does that mean that either the prosecution or defense have an advantage over the other? The only person it provides an advantage to is an independent third party who wants to gain an accurate understanding of what was said.
However, "unfair advantages" in a judicial proceeding might be seen by some as including:
- not being able to have legal representation or an advocate
- not having access to, or full knowledge of, the legal/judicial standards and processes used to determine your guilt or innocence.
It's not like the elders prevent you from having representation or an advocate, or that they restrict you from reading the judicial committee instructions included in the "Shepherd the Flock" book.