Tag: ron wyden

Categories
Edward Snowden News

Press Release: Courage letters being delivered to governments call for the safe protection of Edward Snowden

  • Parliamentarians to hand letters to US, German and UK governments asking for Edward Snowden’s protection
  • Letter addressed to President Putin asks Russia to re-grant Edward Snowden asylum
  • Amnesty joins the call for Edward Snowden to be able to seek asylum in a country of his choice

This week, letters will be handed to the governments of the UK, US and Germany calling on them to protect NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and allow him the right to asylum. Edward Snowden’s legal status is once again that of an asylum-seeker with temporary leave to remain in Russia, pending the result of an asylum application made this month, after his initial one year of temporary asylum ended.

Courage – the organisation that has been running Snowden’s official defence fund for the past year – sets out in the letters significant revelations from Edward Snowden, the persecution he faces and the reasons he should be protected. The letters are being handed out by elected representatives (Senator Ron Wyden in the US, Hans Christian Ströbele MP in Germany and Caroline Lucas MP in the UK) that they were hand-delivered to on Friday.

As Mr Snowden is currently without assured asylum, Courage’s letters encourage support for his safe protection and for his asylum application to be granted by Russia, without blockage from foreign governments. In addition, Courage has delivered a letter to the Russian embassy in Washington, DC, asking President Putin to grant Snowden’s renewed asylum application.

On Friday, Amnesty International called on governments around the world to “facilitate [Mr Snowden’s] travel and process any asylum application he should file”, a call reiterated by the representatives delivering Courage’s letters.

In the US, the letter being delivered calls on the US to drop “the Espionage Act charges against him and to formally acknowledge his invaluable contributions to Americans’ understanding of their government” as doing so “would both save Edward Snowden from persecution but also show future Snowdens that exposing wrongdoing is conscientious and appreciated.”

In Germany, where public reaction to the revelations has been one of the strongest worldwide, prompting a Parliamentary inquiry, the letter Member of Parliament Hans-Christian Ströbele will deliver asks the German government to not only support asylum for Snowden, but “to afford safe passage to speak to the ongoing Bundestag inquiry, and to encourage other countries to take similar measures.” Ströbele, a member of the Parliamentary Control Council that oversees Germany’s intelligence servces, said:

I hope this initiative will help us to bring Snowden to Germany as a witness in our committee but also, and this is more important, to give him in Germany a better, normal and free life.

In a press release, Ströbele said he would be passing on the letter to Germany’s federal government.

Caroline Lucas MP, who will deliver Courage’s letter in the UK, said on Friday at her constituency office in Brighton:

Edward Snowden has been criminalised for demonstrating the courage of his convictions.

I urge the Government to offer Mr Snowden the safe haven he deserves. To do otherwise is to perpetuate his unjustified persecution.

His leaks raised fundamental questions regarding the balance between security and privacy. I, and many others, believe we have that balance wrong. It is crucial we are able to hold our government to account – and that national security laws are not illegitimately used in order to undermine freedom of speech in the public interest.

Courage’s letter delivered to the Russian embassy in Washington, DC, asks President Putin to grant Edward Snowden permanent asylum status:

Looking favorably on Mr Snowden’s new application would show that the Russian government respects the right to asylum. It would send a strong signal about the need for decisive action to defend european privacy and associational rights from interference by other states. We ask that the Russian government do whatever is in its power to ensure that Edward Snowden remain safe in the face of real and significant threats.

Full text of the letters is available (US, UK, Germany [English translation], Russia).

IMG_20140801_143957

Strobele_Snowden_SWSLetter

Categories
Edward Snowden News

Press Release: Americans, Brits and Germans want their governments to protect Edward Snowden

6:30pm GMT

  • As Edward Snowden’s year of temporary asylum in Russia expires, German, UK, US and Russian governments are asked to take action
  • US will be asked to drop its charges against Snowden
  • Supporters across 39 countries have joined the call from Snowden’s defence fund, Courage, for Snowden’s asylum and protection
  • Germany, UK and US supporters lead Courage’s ‘Stand With Snowden’ campaign, calling for Snowden’s continued protection

Today, on the final day of Edward Snowden’s year of temporary asylum in Russia, members of Courage, the organisation that has run his official defence fund for the past year, write to those governments where support for Snowden has been greatest. Since June this year, Courage has been running a campaign asking members of the public to submit photos showing they “Stand With Snowden.” As his asylum ends, Courage asks the governments of countries where the support was greatest to “ask them to respond to this call.”

Today it was announced that Edward Snowden has applied for permanent political asylum in Russia, a year after he was awarded temporary asylum by the Russian Federation after one month stranded in Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport, following a decision by the US State Department to announce the cancellation of his passport. As his temporary asylum expires today, he is formally an asylum-seeker once again. It is therefore paramount at this critical time that governments around the world respond to their citizens’ wishes and help protect Edward Snowden. Courage will also be writing to President Putin to encourage Russia to renew Mr Snowden’s asylum.

Over the last year, Edward Snowden has been able to actively participate in the debate he began. Thanks to the protection Russia has afforded him, he has been able to lead a relatively normal life in that country. In the letters to be delivered tomorrow, Courage sets out for each government the impact and importance of Snowden’s revelations. Courage asks that governments around the world support his courageous action in showing how their citizens’ rights were being violated by the NSA and GCHQ, and to support his legal right to asylum to allow his continued participation in the debate on mass surveillance. Courage will also ask the United States to drop its charges against Snowden.

Tomorrow, 1st August, Courage will deliver letters calling for Edward Snowden’s protection to elected representatives in Germany, Britain, the US and to Russia. In the UK and Germany, Members of Parliament Hans-Christian Ströbele and Caroline Lucas will be accepting these letters. Letters will also be delivered to US Senator Ron Wyden and the Russian Government. Please follow @CourageFound and this page for updates on the deliveries.

Sarah Harrison, Acting Director of Courage said:

Whilst it is heartening to see so many members of the public standing up in support of Snowden, most governments around the world, with the exclusion of Russia a year ago, have done little to protect this legal asylum-seeker. As we reach the time of his asylum renewal, I hope that more governments will have the courage and conscience to do what their own citizens tell them is right. Snowden faces decades in prison in the US, due to Obama’s war on whistleblowers. Last year military whistleblower Chelsea Manning was sentenced to 35 years in prison. Earlier this week Amnesty called on President Obama to grant Manning’s immediate release. The United States’ political persecution of whistleblowers must stop. Governments around the world should not allow for another Manning: protect Snowden whilst he’s still free.

Although letters are being delivered tomorrow, Courage will keep its Stand With Snowden campaign page open to allow the public around the world to continue to show their support. So far, photos have been submitted from 39 countries around the world, with support mapped from as far afield as Brazil, India, China, Pakistan, Nigeria, Japan and Egypt. The diverse spread of photos demonstrates how Edward Snowden’s revelations resonate with people around the world.

cape town stands with

Courage originally began in August 2013 as The Journalistic Source Protection Defence Fund and has run Edward Snowden’s defence fund since that time. Courage’s official Edward Snowden support site is located at https://edwardsnowden.com and the related twitter account at @CourageSnowden.

In addition to running the official defence fund for Edward Snowden and preparing to do the same for others in the future who risk life or liberty to make significant contributions to the historical record, Courage advocates for the protection of journalists’ sources and the public’s right to receive their information as guaranteed in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Read more about donating to Courage, its funding and its mission at https://staging.couragefound.org

 

Categories
Edward Snowden News

Sen. Leahy introduces new USA Freedom Act to curb NSA surveillance powers

Categories
News Whistleblowing

CIA spying on its own “internal channels” for whistleblowers

McClatchy reports that the Central Intelligence Agency may be “intercepting the communications of officials who handle whistleblower cases.” The Senate Intelligence Committee’s classified 6,000-page report into the CIA’s post-9/11 interrogation programme is still yet to be published and the Committee has already accused the agency of illegally spying on that probe.

Cia-lobby-seal

Now it has emerged that the CIA retaliated against an official who cooperated with the Senate investigation, and Senate members emailed one another to accuse the agency’s inspector general of failing to investigate that retaliation – and the CIA has obtained at least one of those emails.

As McClatchy writes, “The email controversy points to holes in the intelligence community’s whistleblower protection systems and raises fresh questions about the extent to which intelligence agencies can elude congressional oversight.” If the Senate cannot investigate the CIA independently and free of retaliation fears, who can? How can intelligence agencies be held accountable if they even intercept communications into their own operations?

From internal channels to insider threats

It is already difficult enough for government employees in the US to come forward with their concerns. If intelligence community officials fear reprisal, they have even less incentive to expose wrongdoing through internal channels. US Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Wyden have publicly warned that if public employees are committed to blowing the whistle and internal channels are compromised, it is to be expected that some will anonymously seek other ways to voice their misgivings.

Truly meaningful whistleblower protections need to include the option of a legitimate channel for confidential disclosures… However, if potential whistleblowers believe that disclosing waste, fraud or abuse means putting a target on their backs for retaliation, they will be intimidated into silence. The failure to provide such protected alternatives could result in whistleblowers choosing to make unprotected disclosures in public forums, with potential negative consequences for national security.

The CIA’s illegal monitoring of whistleblower communications has been seen as part of the Obama Administration’s Insider Threat programme, which categorically treats leaks of classified information about wrongdoing as aiding America’s enemies. Introduced in an October 2011 executive order as a direct response to US Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning’s disclosures, the programme covers “virtually every federal department and agency”, including those who are not concerned with national security matters.

A series of reports by McClatchy over the past year describe a range of measures designed to encourage public officials to report on colleagues who they perceive to be exhibiting unusual behaviour. The programme has taken profiling to extreme lengths: late last year it was revealed that the personal details of 5,000 US citizens who had purchased a book on defeating polygraph tests had been retained on the off-chance that they might apply for a job in a federal agency at some point in the future.

This new controversy about the Insider Threat programme exacerbates an already deeply problematic situation for potential whistleblowers within the US intelligence community. Recent public statements by officials responsible for whistleblower protection within the NSA display a reluctance to take complaints seriously, suggesting that within that agency at least, officials see their role as containing rather than engaging with the concerns of employees.

“Don’t bother me with this”

In a recent interview for PBS, the NSA’s former General Counsel Vito Potenza admitted that he would have dismissed Thomas Drake’s criticisms of US warrantless wiretapping:

If he came to me, someone who was not read into “The Program,” right, and not a part of what we were doing and told me that we were running amok essentially and violating the Constitution and it was in that timeframe when there was an awful lot going on and we were all worried about the next [terrorist] attack, there’s no doubt in my mind I would have told him, you know, go talk to your management. Don’t bother me with this. I mean, you know, the minute he said, if he did say you’re using this to violate the Constitution, I mean, I probably would have stopped the conversation at that point quite frankly. So, I mean, if that’s what he said he said, then anything after that I probably wasn’t listening to anyway.

Drake subsequently blew the whistle to the media, and before the government’s case collapsed just days ahead of trial, he was facing an Espionage Act charge that could have imprisoned him for decades.

Similarly, Edward Snowden made enquiries within the NSA about the legality and morality of that agency’s mass, unchecked surveillance. He spoke up at least ten separate times — the Office of the Director of National Intelligence has in fact released one of Snowden’s emails. When he was ignored, Snowden was compelled to give documents detailing the NSA’s spying programs to investigative journalists.

In February this year, NSA Inspector General George Ellard, the official responsible for dealing with whistleblower communications, outlined his likely response to a complaint about the collection of US call data:

Ellard was asked what he would have done if Snowden had come to him with complaints. Had this happened, Ellard says would have said something like, “Hey, listen, fifteen federal judges have certified this program is okay.” (He was referring to the NSA phone records collection program.)

“I would also have an independent obligation to assess the constitutionality of that law,” Ellard stated. “Perhaps it’s the case that we could have shown, we could have explained to Mr. Snowden his misperceptions, his lack of understanding of what we do.”

Insufficient security or insufficient democracy?

The Insider Threat programme and the stated attitudes of the very officials responsible for facilitating internal channels draw a picture of a US administration that is deeply hostile, not only to disclosure of government information, but to internal criticism of its activities from those charged to carry them out.

Famously, President Obama has overseen the prosecution of more Espionage Act cases than all previous presidents combined. The majority of those cases concern individuals trying to blow the whistle on wrongdoing. Within their number include cases, like that of Thomas Drake, where employees have tried to make their case within the ‘official channels’ ostensibly created to facilitate internal whistleblowing.

It is ironic that the United States has responded to disclosures of illegality and abuse, not by subjecting its programmes to democratic input or ensuring that future whistleblowers have better options, but by cracking down on those who speak up and the journalism they enable. The US administration has treated whistleblowers as an issue of insufficient security rather than insufficient democracy.