SIGN UP NOW
Follow the NWC on Twitter!Follow the NWC on Facebook!

Neon Tommy considers plight of national security whistleblowers

Posted on July 29, 2010 by Richard Renner

Student Paresh Dave of the Annenberg School of Communication and Journalism at the University of Southern California (USC) has written an incisive story about how national security whistleblowers can protect themselves while blowing the whistle on misconduct by government officials. Dave's story is called, "Whistleblowers Have Some Protection, If They Leak To The Right People." He notes that the government is currently investigating detained Specialist Bradley Manning to see if he could be the source for the WikiLeaks.org release of 91,000 classified State Department cables. Dave spoke with me about my prior blog post about how Manning might have protected himself if he had consulted a lawyer before blowing the whistle on the unnecessary civilian casualties of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. If he had learned about the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, 10 U.S.C. § 1034, he could have made his disclosures to members of Congress and preserved a legal defense to the impending charges.

Dave's article is clear about the shortcomings of the whistleblower protections for military and federal civilian employees. Congress has created a patchwork of whistleblower protections that give employees in certain private industry sectors, and certain state and local government employees protection from retaliation through private causes of action. It has not done so for military personnel, and the federal civilian employees are shunted to the disappointing Merit System Protection Board.

Dave's article also mentions a mark-up that had been scheduled for yesterday in the House Committee for Oversight and Government Reform on the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act, HR 1507.  That mark-up was canceled on short notice. The prospects for passing meaningful improvements in whistleblower protections for federal employees are now dimmer.
Tags: , , , , ,
  • Print
  • Comments
  • Trackbacks
  • Share Link

US government arrests another whistleblower

Posted on June 8, 2010 by Richard Renner

The U.S. government has arrested another whistleblower. Wired.com reports that the government is holding Specialist Bradley Manning in detention in Kuwait pending charges that he supplied a classified video to WikiLeaks.org.  I reported here in April that this video depicts US armed forces killing about a dozen civilians in Iraq, including two Reuters journalists. Manning had reached out to convicted computer hacker Adrian Lamo who has now acknowledged that he told authorities about Manning's role in leaking the video to WikiLeaks. The government had previously identified WikiLeaks as a security threat (see my prior blog entry about this government memo), and threatened to prosecute anyone leaking classified information. Together with the Thomas Drake prosecution, we see that the present administration is picking up the pace in using criminal charges against whistleblowers. The administration also continues to hold UBS whistleblower Bradley Birkenfeld while his pardon petition awaits actions.

It is early in the case, and we cannot expect that all the facts are out yet. Still, I am already concerned about whether the government's prosecution is selective, or retaliatory for the critical content of the Wikileaks video. I would ask that the government make a measured response that is proportionate to the violation of classification rules and not affected by the government's embarrassment over the publicity about its violence in Iraq.

Also, it appears that Specialist Manning was not aware of some of the basics in how to protect yourself as a whistleblower.  Instead of going to a convicted criminal who has had time in jail to appreciate the government's interest and power, whistleblowers should go to a personal lawyer.  The communications with the lawyer for the purpose of getting legal advice and counsel are privileged. The sooner a whistleblower gets a good lawyer, the better off the whistleblower can be in the end.  A lawyer could have advised Manning about his right to make disclosures to members of Congress under the Military Whistleblower Protection Act, 10 U.S.C. § 1034. With thoughtful selection of the right material for the right member of Congress, Manning might have accomplished his disclosures in a way that would have protected him from this arrest. Perhaps others will learn from this experience.

Here is another issue that might be helpful to Manning and other national security whistleblowers.  "While the Government must be able to prevent the public disclosure of information that would compromise the national security, a democratic government accountable to the people must be as transparent as possible and must not withhold information for self-serving reasons or simply to avoid embarrassment," National Security Council official William Leary wrote in a blog post saved by Politico's Josh Gerstein. Indeed, presidential classification directives, published in Executive Orders, have traditionally barred classification of information to conceal violations of law, inefficiency or administrative error, or to prevent embarrassment, or delay the release of' information that does not require protection in the interest of national security. See, for example, Executive Orders 12065 and 12356, 47 Fed. Reg. 14874 (April 6, 1982). This principal suggests that some balancing is appropriate to show that our democratic government does not shy away from having citizens know what is done in their name.
Tags: , , ,
  • Print
  • Comments
  • Trackbacks
  • Share Link