Secrets and Leaks

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul Sagar
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Relevant Information ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Law ◽  
Complex Relationships ◽  
Unauthorized Disclosure ◽  
Fear Of Retaliation

This book examines the complex relationships among executive power, national security, and secrecy. State secrecy is vital for national security, but it can also be used to conceal wrongdoing. How then can we ensure that this power is used responsibly? Typically, the onus is put on lawmakers and judges, who are expected to oversee the executive. Yet because these actors lack access to the relevant information and the ability to determine the harm likely to be caused by its disclosure, they often defer to the executive's claims about the need for secrecy. As a result, potential abuses are more often exposed by unauthorized disclosures published in the press. But should such disclosures, which violate the law, be condoned? Drawing on several cases, this book argues that though whistleblowing can be morally justified, the fear of retaliation usually prompts officials to act anonymously—that is, to “leak” information. As a result, it becomes difficult for the public to discern when an unauthorized disclosure is intended to further partisan interests. Because such disclosures are the only credible means of checking the executive, the book claims, they must be tolerated, and, at times, even celebrated. However, the public should treat such disclosures skeptically and subject irresponsible journalism to concerted criticism.

Nixon and the resurgence of executive privilege

2019 ◽  
pp. 140-178
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Baron
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
White House ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Law ◽  
Security Concerns

With the passage and implementation of FOIA under Johnson, the CLDC moves into the next iteration by examining the implementation, oversight, and amendment phase. This was driven in large part by Nixon's actions after coming into office. While Nixon talked about transparency, he took steps to expand White House control over information, not just following the precedent of Eisenhower, but in expanding the scope of executive privilege. Nixon asserted that executive privilege covered all White House conversations with any staff, appointees, and employees, expanding beyond the national security concerns in the public interest of his predecessors. Nixon's actions to expand executive power left Congress in the position of again grappling with ways to respond, including eventually amending FOIA to strengthen the law as an oversight measure. The first FOIA amendments began under Nixon but would not be finalized until President Ford was in office.

Control over Executive Branch Information: Who “Judges”?

2013 ◽  
Vol 46 (03) ◽  
pp. 498-504
Author(s):  
Nancy Kassop
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The Other ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Constitutional Interpretation ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
Checks And Balances ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Press

You may be forgiven if you associate Lou Fisher's name primarily with his robust defense of Congress's preeminent authority in national security and budgetary matters, or with the idea that courts are only one of three co-equal players in the constitutional dialogue that occurs among all of the branches, or with the related effort to disabuse scholars, the press, and the public of the profoundly incorrect notion that courts have “the last word” in constitutional interpretation. All of these themes are, indeed, key components of Fisher's vast body of scholarly work and public testimony, and they will be forever linked to him as their progenitor. Just as solidly grounded in impeccable research and unassailable logic is Fisher's work on executive power. It fits snugly within his Madisonian emphasis on a government of limited and shared powers, enforced through effective checks and balances, where each institution exercises its respective power while overseeing the other branches to ensure respect for constitutional boundaries.

Should the Law Condone Unauthorized Disclosures?

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul Sagar
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Regulatory Mechanism ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
Unauthorized Disclosure

This chapter examines whether the law ought to condone unauthorized disclosures of classified information. The features that make the unauthorized disclosure of classified information an effective and credible regulatory mechanism are the very same ones that raise concerns about its lawfulness and legitimacy. Because such disclosures override the classification decisions made by officials responsible for national security, our reliance on them seems to conflict with our commitment to the rule of law and the norms of democracy. The chapter explains what the law has to say about unauthorized disclosures of classified information and shows that the law is not favorably disposed toward the official responsible for making the unauthorized disclosure. It also argues against revising the law to take account of the fact that unauthorized disclosures can allow lawmakers and citizens to become aware of misconduct that would otherwise be shielded by state secrecy.

Information Is Power

2021 ◽  
pp. 230-245
Author(s):  
Mary-Rose Papandrea
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Government Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Press ◽  
Security Information ◽  
Constitutional Right ◽  
Government Secrecy ◽  
Right Of Access

Balancing the equally important but sometimes conflicting priorities of government transparency for public accountability versus government secrecy for national security seems intractable. One possibility is to recognize a constitutional right of access to government information. This would support democratic self-governance, allow the public to engage in meaningful oversight, and provide access to necessary information without the game of leaks. It could radically refocus arguments regarding the rights of government employees to reveal national security information and of third parties to publish it. Recognizing this right faces an uphill battle against decades of First Amendment jurisprudence. It also faces innumerable logistical and practical obstacles. It would not eliminate the need to determine when the public, the press, and government insiders can disclose national security information. Nevertheless, the ongoing collapse of press access norms and government’s increasing desire to operate outside public view may warrant dramatically rethinking First Amendment scope and protections.

scholarly journals Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Intervensi Pemberitaan dalam Kerangka Kemerdekaan Pers Nasional

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Fuqoha Fuqoha ◽  
Indrianti Azhar Firdausi ◽  
Arga Eka Sanjaya
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Study ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Press ◽  
The World ◽  
A Priority ◽  
The Law ◽  
Journalistic Ethics ◽  
Descriptive Qualitative

Law protection for journalists has been guaranteed through legislation as outlined in law number 40 of 1999 concerning the press. Through the press law, the independence of the national press is a priority as a form of protection in the world of the press. In order to safeguard the independence of the national press, an independent body was formed which took care of and supervised the national press, the press council. Among the duties and functions of the press council is to enforce journalistic ethics through a journalistic code of ethics as a guide for journalists both journalists and press companies. The dynamics that occur, violations of the journalistic code of ethics sometimes create clashes with the public or the community who feel disadvantaged which results in conflict with the law. This research is a descriptive qualitative study with a normative juridical approach. From the analysis of this study shows that legal protection against violations of the journalistic code of ethics and the independence of the national press is adjusted to the main laws of the press against the intervention of parties who feel disadvantaged. The independence of the national press is directed at independence and without intervention in a story.

scholarly journals PROTECTION ON FREEDOM OF THE PRESS FOR FOREIGN JOURNALISTS AND JOURNALISTIC VISA IN INDONESIA

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 56-65
Author(s):  
Fianka Aiza ◽  
Lena Farsia
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
National Security ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Freedom Of The Press ◽  
Legal Rules ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
The Press ◽  
Freedom Of Press ◽  
The Law

This study analyses how Indonesia enforces the law to protect the freedom of the press for foreign journalists and imposes strict visa regulations on them. The method used to conduct this research is the normative legal method. This study shows that Indonesia upholds human rights such as freedom of expression, but there are no specific legal rules to uphold such rights over foreign journalists. Rules are only available on the enactment of a journalistic visa. Therefore, it is recommended for Indonesia's Lawmakers to compose a new Law to uphold the rights and obligations of foreign journalists while they are in Indonesia and develop a monitoring body for foreign journalists so that Indonesia can ensure the protection of freedom of the press and the national security. Keywords: Foreign journalists; Freedom of Press; Journalistic Visa.

Should We Rely on Whistleblowers?

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul Sagar
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
The Public

This chapter examines the circumstances under which an official will be justified in violating laws that prohibit unauthorized disclosures of classified information. It explains why we cannot rely on the practice of whistleblowing to counter the misuse of state secrecy. It argues that an official may “blow the whistle” if he/she encounters classified information that clearly reveals wrongdoing posing an immediate and serious threat to the public interest, and if he/she makes a good faith effort to minimize the harm that the publication of this information may cause national security. It also asserts that the official must identify himself/herself so that we can assess whether his/her view of what constitutes a wrongful exercise of executive power is a disinterested one. Finally, it shows that would-be whistleblowers have little incentive to disclose their identity, because doing so makes them vulnerable to retaliation from their managers and colleagues.

The Need for a National Data Breach Notification Law

2018 ◽  
pp. 1657-1668
Author(s):  
Kirk Y. Williams
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
State Agencies ◽  
Cyber Attack ◽  
Academic Institutions ◽  
National Data ◽  
Data Breach ◽  
The Public ◽  
Governmental Agencies ◽  
Foreign Government ◽  
The Law

Individuals, groups, organizations, companies, and foreign government agencies that threaten the National Security of other countries, not only threaten their National Security but also threaten the security of state agencies, and the security of the individuals, groups, organizations, academic institutions that are consumers of those companies. Therefore, a National Data Breach Notification Law that would inform consumers once unwanted intrusions in the form of a cyber-attack occurs that results in the disclosure of their personal and financial information is needed. In the requests for a National Data Breach Notification Law suggestions have been made on what the law should include, and how the information should be reported to the public and to the individuals affected by the cyber-attack. This chapter explores how a National Data Breach Notification Law should be produced that would require uniformity across all states with guidelines that relate to the compliance of the law as it can affect individuals, organizations, academic institutions, companies, and governmental agencies.

Let’s Be Practical

2021 ◽  
pp. 123-139
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Adler ◽  
Bruce D. Brown
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
First Amendment ◽  
Current Situation ◽  
The Press ◽  
Espionage Act ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government

The proliferation of leak cases over the last decade suggests that a case against the press for publishing government secrets may be on the horizon. Before 2009, an unwritten understanding between the government and the press of governmental forbearance and press responsibility provided more effective press protection than the First Amendment. While continued reliance on this understanding would be preferable to a changed law, the scales have tipped toward the suppression of speech in national security reporting, which has shaken that understanding. The current situation is so bad that it is now time to consider reforming the Espionage Act. Reformed legislation should provide a floor that permits First Amendment defenses, the law should act as a backstop if those arguments fail, and it should be as limited and precise as possible so that it does not inadvertently create a dangerous new power to prosecute the press.

Crafting a New Compact in the Public Interest

2021 ◽  
pp. 39-56
Author(s):  
Keith B. Alexander ◽  
Jamil N. Jaffer
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
National Security ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Media Environment ◽  
The Public ◽  
Fair Treatment ◽  
The Press ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Relationship

Leaks of highly classified information, popular views of government national security efforts, and changes in the media environment in recent years have resulted in a significant decay in the relationship between the government and the media and public trust in both institutions. To correct this harmful trend, a significant recalibration of the government-media relationship and the establishment of a new compact between them would best serve the public interest. The government should be more transparent about its national security efforts and more self-critical in classification decisions and should explain national security activities it undertakes, defending and justifying classified programs in detail whenever possible. The press must likewise be willing to afford the government fair treatment, including noting government efforts to protect national security, and to appropriately balance civil rights and privacy. It is important that these institutions work together to establish new mores on classification, government transparency, and a more responsible approach to classified disclosures.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document