Re: [privacy] U.S. DoJ: Reporters May be Prosecuted for Leaks

[Florian Weimer <fw () deneb enyo de>]

* Thomas C. Greene:

> It's a little different in the USA.  The Constitution specifically guarantees 
> freedom of the press.  This doesn't merely mean the freedom to publish; 
> that's already covered under the right of free speech.  It means the right to 
> gather news without government interference.  

> So long as the journo in question didn't obtain the information illegally, 

What is "illegal"?  What is ethical?  Is paying your sources alright?
Good leaks are worth a couple of kEURs over here.

> it's fair game, and opening my mail is not a crime (yet).  No responsible 
> journo would publish classified information when it's clear that doing so 
> would cause more harm than good.

Here's a quote from an article that was published by the German
magazine "Cicero":

| Nach dem Afghanistan-Krieg richtet sich Zarqawi Anfang 2002 in
| Zahedan, Isfahan und in Teheran neue Lager und sichere Häuser
| ein. Nach Teheran reisen seine europäischen Anhänger, bringen Geld,
| neue Passidentitäten, holen sich Instruktionen. Die Kommunikation
| läuft über Mittelsmänner und per Telefon. Mit in der Leitung: der
| deutsche Bundesnachrichtendienst, der Zarqawis schweizer
| Satellitentelefon mit der Nummer 0041-793686306 ebenso überwacht wie
| dessen iranische Mobiltelefone mit der Nummer 0098-9135153994 und
| 0098-218757638.
|  
| Unterstützt von radikalen Gruppen innerhalb des Geheimdienstes der
| Revolutionären Garden des Irans kann Zarqawi ungefährdet im Iran die
| Festnetznummer 0098-9112311436 nutzen. In Isfahan bedient er sich des
| Telefons mit der Nummer 0098-9112399346, deren Anschlussinhaber ein
| Ahmed Abdul Salam, Bahar Street, Block No. 27, Kukak Area, Asfahan,
| Iran, ist. Unter seiner Faxnummer 0098-218757638 ist er für seine
| Gefolgsleute in dringenden Fällen erreichbar. Was deutsche
| Sicherheitsbehörden unter der Hand bestätigen, ist auch für ihre
| jordanischen Kollegen der Grund, warum Zarqawi so erfolgreich
| war. "Und ist", so ein jordanischer Ermittler: "Dass beide Seiten
| sich aus religiösen Gründen hassen, hat sie nie daran gehindert, eng
| zu kooperieren."

(<http://www.cicero.de/97.php?ress_id=1&item=554>, second page)

Even if you can't read German, you'll note the phone numbers and the
name "Zarkawi".  In fact, these paragraphs list phone numbers which
have been monitored by intelligence services and are allegedly
connected to Zarkawi.  This data comes from an internal dossier
produced by the German federal police (BKA, to be precise) which was
widely disseminated inside the agency.  For the scope of its
distribution, the contents was not properly sanitized.  Of course, it
leaked, and Cicero decided to publish very detailed information from
the report, in a way that maximized embarrassment to the BKA and the
German intelligence services.  Maybe even sources have been put in
danger.

Of course, fellow journalists vigorously defended Cicero's actions.
Not just in Germany, but around the world:

| In a letter of protest to Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble, IPI
| wrote that the case involving Cicero and the journalist Schirra
| contained a number of worrying developments for press freedom and
| freedom of expression in Germany.
| 
| IPI wrote that it appeared that Cicero and Schirra were the victims
| of a perfect storm combining a heightened awareness of terrorism
| issues within Europe with a tough and unyielding approach from
| prosecutors that imitates the prosecutor's actions against
| journalists protecting their sources in the Valerie Plame case in
| the United States.

<http://service.cms.apa.at/cms/ipi/freedom_detail-new.html?country=/KW0001/KW0003/KW0062/>

(To put the actions of the police in context, you must know that in
Germany (and probably across Europe), it is customary to seize all
documents owned by the suspect for later analysis.  Normal citizens
clearly haven't the protection journalists demand for them.)

Even if the Cicero incident is isolated, the reaction in the press
shows that few journalists would exercise the restraint you demand.

> But the public's interest in being informed trumps most of what the
> govt. would like to keep hidden.  That's our law. You can disagree
> with it all you want, but that is irrelevant.

Sorry, this is just rubbish.  There ought to be limits to what you can
publish in the name of public interest.  "But hundreds of thousands of
readers really like stuff like that" is not an execuse for certain
privacy invasions, or risking the lifes of those who try to protect
your own nation.

Of course, it would have been perfectly acceptable and even reasonable
to point out that the federal does properly sanitize dossiers before
distribution.  This would have been quite annoying to some people,
too, but it could have helped to improve the situation without causing
real damage.  But the Cicero article did not even try to make this
point.

> The attorney general's job is not Constitutionally mandated. Mine
> is. So nuts to him.

This attitude is the "we're first-class citizens, and you are not"
attitude I find so disgusting.

On the other hand, I don't particularly like official secrets at all
"The Official Secrets Act is not to protect secrets, it is to protect
officials" and things like that.  But the fix is to have as few of
them as possible, as a matter of principle, and not to have an army of
journalists who publish them when they can.
_______________________________________________
privacy mailing list
privacy () whitestar linuxbox org
http://www.whitestar.linuxbox.org/mailman/listinfo/privacy