It is true that Indigenous oral tradition is unfairly downplayed. Narrow-minded Western historians that assume history only extends back to the invention of writing ignore the validity of sophisticated oral story-telling in local cultures.
Indigenous elders recognize the technical precision of written history but point out its failure to convey the full range of emotion, nuance and rhythm found in traditional story telling, especially when several elders gather with each person contributing their take on the story.
However, I don't think this tradition was intended to sidestep transparency and accountability in official business.
Some in the Indigenous community see the act of reviewing the minutes of a meeting and asking questions to be an act of undermining authority.