Tag: uk

Categories
Journalism News

British journalists call for an end to “routine” surveillance

In the summer of 2013, many wondered why journalists in the UK, one of the countries most implicated in mass surveillance, didn’t pursue Edward Snowden’s revelations more aggressively. Even when the British government began to directly intimidate those who were reporting on the Snowden documents – by detaining David Miranda under anti-terrorism legislation and insisting that they should be able to destroy computer equipment within the Guardian offices – protest against these actions in the UK media was muted, with a significant section of the UK press deciding to stand up for the rights of the UK state rather than the freedom to report.

That may now, belatedly, be changing. A new scandal has demonstrated that journalists have a real interest in fighting surveillance – and that current UK practices put source protection right in the firing line. This month, London’s Metropolitan Police published a report that confirmed they had used surveillance powers to obtain the phone records of Sun journalist Tom Newton Dunn without his knowledge in order to find out who his source was.

This direct threat to journalists’ interests has focused attention on just how routine communications data (metadata) orders are in the UK. Unlike ‘live’ intercepts of data or content, which require a court order, British public bodies can obtain historical metadata simply by making a request to a telecommunications provider for any data they hold. There is no judicial involvement in these orders, about half a million of which are made in the UK every year. Even the official charged with overseeing these orders has admitted that the 514,608 requests made in the UK in 2013 “seems to me to be a very large number. It has the feel of being too many.”

There are few safeguards on the use of these orders under the UK’s Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA). In particular, RIPA makes no provision for the protection of information that might relate to journalists’ communication with sources, or indeed communications with lawyers. The ability of police to effectively obtain metadata at will means that many, if not most, journalists in the UK are no longer able to offer their sources an assurance of confidentiality. Recent changes to UK surveillance laws suggest that journalists and lawyers should now treat online services and webmail with a similar degree of caution.

Journalists have responded to the Metropolitan Police’s report with op-eds and  a Save our Sources campaign. The absence of safeguards in the law is now also the subject of a legal challenge launched in the European Court of Human Rights by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, the third such challenge to be made to the UK’s surveillance practices since the start of reporting on Edward Snowden’s revelations.

Gavin Millar QC, who is aiding the Bureau of Investigative Journalism with the case, has said that police “routinely” use RIPA powers to obtain journalists’ metadata and identify their sources:

This circumvents the rights of a journalist to protect a source and to a hearing before a judge before any order is made to disclose such information.

The sheer volume of data being harvested by GCHQ under RIPA means that confidential journalistic material is also being covertly accessed and analysed by security and intelligence all the time. Again sources are being identified – but on a much larger scale.

Yet there is no word in RIPA or the government’s code of practice under it about these key journalistic rights. The UK simply flouts the Convention.

Categories
News Whistleblowing

Germany’s whistleblower protection among the worst in the G20, says new report

A new report on the state of whistleblower protection in some of the world’s richest countries has found that Germany ranks alongside Argentina, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Italy, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Turkey as one of the countries that does the least to ensure that whistleblowers can speak out without fear of retribution.

The report, which was co-authored by researchers from Australian NGO Blueprint for Free Speech, Transparency International Australia, Griffith University and Melbourne University, compares G20 countries’ legal frameworks with the commitments they signed up to in the G20’s 2013-14 Anti-Corruption Action Plan, where they agreed:

to ensure that those reporting on corruption, including journalists, can exercise their function without fear of any harassment or threat or of private or government legal action for reporting in good faith

The report sets out 14 separate criteria based on the G20 agreement, other international agreements on whistleblower protection and best practice documents drawn up by intergovernmental organisations and NGOs.

What the report found

The report found that, while there had been real improvement over the past decade, serious shortcomings remained in the legal systems of most G20 countries – and those shortcomings affected most of the areas potential whistleblowers would be concerned about. Provisions for whistleblowers to remain anonymous when using internal channels to express their concerns were identified as a particular weakness across the G20, as were the rules around disclosure to third parties – including, where appropriate, the media.

The provision of independent bodies and mechanisms to deal with whistleblower complaints and to report on how legal protections were being used were also seen as poor across the countries surveyed. In addition, the authors note that where regulations exist, they tend to apply to the public sector only – governments have been much less active in ensuring that private sector whistleblowers can speak out in confidence.

Legal regimes, of course, only tell part of the story. As the report’s authors point out, the formal presence of adequate whistleblower protection laws does not in itself tell you whether they are implemented consistently, or whether “cultural or other norms [in a particular country] indirectly assist in practical protection of whistleblowers.”

As we’ve noted previously, legal frameworks are a particularly poor guide to what might happen in difficult cases, especially those where disclosures have a national security dimension. Some G20 countries, like the UK and Canada, explicitly exclude military and intelligence personnel from their ‘whistleblower’ definition and all the protections in law that derive from that (the report calls this “a glaring gap”). Others, like the United States, have a legislative framework that is well rated – and in theory extends to its intelligence agencies – but in practice apply very different rules, and extreme anti-whistleblower measures, when classified information is involved.

Why did Germany score so badly?

Germany’s poor score in the report might come as a surprise to some, given the country’s renowned worker representation laws and positive reaction to Edward Snowden’s revelations. But in July 2011, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that Germany’s protection of its own whistleblowers was inadequate.

Brigitte Heinisch und das Urteil des EGMR
The case was brought by Brigitte Heinisch, a nurse who brought the systematic mistreatment of elderly patients to the attention of the healthcare company she worked for. When appeals to management proved ineffective, Heinisch brought legal action against her employers and wrote a leaflet to explain what was happening in the case. The European Court ruled that the public interest in Heinisch’s disclosures outweighed her employers’ right to protect their business reputation and that her summary dismissal had been “disproportionately severe.” She was later awarded compensation by a German court.

In fact, the German legal code only offers limited protection for public officials who are reporting suspicions of corruption – and this came only after a change of the law in 2009. Germany’s employment courts offer limited redress to those who report wrongdoing in good faith, but there remains a strong bias against anonymous reporting and public disclosure. None of the legislative proposals made since the 2011 judgment have attracted the support necessary to secure a change in the law.

Read the full report here

Categories
Courage News Edward Snowden News

Press release: Courage welcomes Russia’s continued protection of Edward Snowden

Courage, which runs Edward Snowden’s official defence fund and his associated asylum campaign, welcomes today’s announcement that Russia will continue its protection of Edward Snowden.

Courage’s Acting Director Sarah Harrison, who facilitated Edward Snowden’s exit from Hong Kong and spent four months in Russia, including 40 days in Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport, securing his initial asylum said:

I’m relieved to hear that Edward Snowden will continue to be protected, keeping him safe from American prosecution. Courage congratulates the Russian people and the dedicated international team of lawyers, campaigners and supporters who have made this happen. Although the US government has lost this round, let us not forget the stakes – last year whistleblower Chelsea Manning was sentenced to 35 years in a US military prison and the Grand Jury against both WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden continues. By hosting Edward Snowden’s defence fund and keeping the public aware of his case, Courage has helped keep Edward Snowden safe for the past year, but his fund will need continued public support to ensure he stays protected for years to come.

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 http://edwardsnowden.com and the related twitter account at @CourageSnowden.

Last month Edward Snowden applied for an extension to his one year temporary asylum that ended on July 31st 2014. Courage has been campaigning for that application to be accepted; hand delivering letters calling for his protection and asylum application not to be blocked to the UK, US and German governments, writing to the Russian embassy in Washington, DC last week asking for his application to be accepted and launching an ad campaign that has been seen by over a million users of Russian social network Vkontakte.

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
Journalism Legislation News

UK watchdog warns that terrorism laws threaten journalists and sources

The UK’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation has said that the British government is drawing its interpretation of ‘terrorism’ too broadly, telling the BBC that the current definition “has begun to catch people it was never really intended to catch.”

gm

In a report delivered to Parliament on 22 July 2014, Anderson expressed particular concern about the possibility of journalists and bloggers having their activities made a subject of UK terrorism laws. The case of David Miranda, the partner of Glenn Greenwald, who was stopped at Heathrow airport for 9 hours in August 2013 and had his electronic equipment seized by UK police brought this issue into sharp focus. The action of UK border police was upheld by the High Court in London on 19 February 2014.

In particular, Anderson points out that the UK does not require a link to acts of violence in the way it defines terrorism, only an intent to “influence the government.”

What the Miranda judgment reveals is that the publication (or threatened publication) of words may equally constitute terrorist action. It seems that the writing of a book, an article or a blog may therefore amount to terrorism if publication is “for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause”, “designed to influence the government” and liable to endanger life or create a serious risk to health or safety.

As Anderson argues, the UK’s statutory definition of terrorism is broad enough that a blogger arguing against the vaccination of children on political or religious grounds could theoretically fall within its bounds if their actions were judged to present a serious risk to public health. Under ancilliary laws, a large swath of speech acts – including the possession of articles for a purpose connected with publication, acts preparatory to publication or even the encouragement of such acts of publication – could also be construed as offences.

The degree of discretion this “over broad” definition allows executive authorities, concludes Anderson “leaves citizens in the dark and risks undermining the rule of law,” weakens public support for terrorism legislation generally and threatens to chill “legitimate enquiry and expression” by introducing the possibility of arbitrary prosecution.

David Miranda’s appeal is due to be heard by the Court of Appeal later this year.