|
08 December 2010 By Bill
Quigley "Information is the currency of
democracy." Thomas Jefferson. Since 9-11, the US government,
through Presidents Bush and Obama, has increasingly
told the US public that "state secrets" will not be
shared with citizens. Candidate Obama pledged to
reduce the use of state secrets, but President Obama
continued the Bush tradition. The Courts and Congress
and international allies have gone meekly along with
the escalating secrecy demands of the US Executive. By labeling tens of millions of
documents secret, the US government has created a huge
vacuum of information. But information is the lifeblood
of democracy. Information about government
contributes to a healthy democracy. Transparency and
accountability are essential elements of good
government. Likewise, "a lack of government
transparency and accountability undermines democracy
and gives rise to cynicism and mistrust," according to
a 2008 Harris survey commissioned by the Association
of Government Accountants. Into the secrecy vacuum stepped
Private Bradley Manning, who, according to the
Associated Press, was able to defeat "Pentagon
security systems using little more than a Lady Gaga CD
and a portable computer memory stick." Manning apparently sent the
information to Wikileaks – a non profit media
organization, which specializes in publishing leaked
information. Wikileaks in turn shared the documents
to other media around the world including the New York
Times and published much of it on its website. Despite criminal investigations
by the US and other governments, it is not clear that
media organizations like Wikileaks can be prosecuted
in the US in light of First Amendment. Recall that
the First Amendment says: "Congress shall make no law
respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging
the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the
right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the government for a redress of grievances." Outraged politicians are claiming
that the release of government information is the
criminal equivalent of terrorism and puts innocent
people's lives at risk. Many of those same
politicians authorized the modern equivalent of carpet
bombing of Baghdad and other Iraqi cities, the
sacrifice of thousands of lives of soldiers and
civilians, and drone assaults on civilian areas in
Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen. Their anger at a
document dump, no matter how extensive, is more than a
little suspect. Everyone, including Wikileaks and
the other media reporting the documents, hopes that no
lives will be lost because of this. So far, that
appears to be the case as McClatchey Newspapers
reported November 28, 2010, that ‘US officials
conceded that they have no evidence to date that the
[prior] release of documents led to anyone's death." The US has been going in the
wrong direction for years by classifying millions of
documents as secrets. Wikileaks and other media which
report these so called secrets will embarrass people
yes. Wikileaks and other media will make leaders
uncomfortable yes. But embarrassment and discomfort
are small prices to pay for a healthier democracy. Wikileaks has the potential to
make transparency and accountability more robust in
the US. That is good for democracy. By Bill Quigley. Bill is Legal Director of the
Center for Constitutional Rights and a professor of
law at Loyola University New Orleans. Bill can be
reached at
quigley77@gmail.com |
Add Comments