Disclosure and reply are too often treated as one governance problem. They are not the same thing.
An institution may be suited to deciding when the existence of a contact event should be acknowledged, while being poorly suited to controlling the technical or diplomatic conditions of any reply. The reverse is also true. Some systems can manage reply discipline well while remaining politically incapable of handling disclosure legitimacy.
That is why mature contact frameworks are moving toward separate chains. When those powers are fused, speed turns into authority too easily. Separation is not elegant, but it gives institutions more chances to slow a bad decision before it becomes irreversible.