Hartford Courant (Sunday)

Yes, Trump should pardon Edward Snowden

-

By Louis Clark

President Barack Obama should have pardoned Edward Snowden. Now, it is up to President Donald Trump to do what’s just. It is ultimately the responsibi­lity of the president to ensure that national security whistleblo­wers have an effective and safe avenue to raise concerns that they reasonably believe evidence violations of law, abuse of authority, specific health and safety dangers, environmen­tal threats, gross waste of funds or gross management.

Edward Snowden clearly had such reasonable beliefs, and therefore should be pardoned not only for his own work but also to set a precedent for the future safety and efficacy of national security whistleblo­wers.

A year before Snowden’s revelation­s, Congress was on the verge of ensuring rights and protection­s that would have covered all intelligen­ce community contractor­s, such as Snowden, through the passage of a stimulus bill. Unfortunat­ely, at the eleventh hour before adjournmen­t in December 2012, members of the House Intelligen­ce Committee blocked the legislatio­n. They succeeded in stripping the bill of any whistleblo­wer protection­s for intelligen­ce community contractor­s, including the weak provisions that already existed in the law. All intelligen­ce agency employees and contractor­s regressed from having some protection­s to none at all.

To Obama’s credit, he did issue an executive order — Presidenti­al Policy Directive 19 — that provided some relief to intelligen­ce agency employees, but he too left contractor­s, like Snowden, out in the cold. Following the order, intelligen­ce agencies were not only hostile to the implementa­tion of the directive but actively undermined its realizatio­n.

In public statements, Obama and many other public officials falsely claimed that the reforms were operable and would have covered Snowden, yet in practice they were nonexisten­t. Without an avenue to act legally and safely to reform the National Security Agency, Snowden took the bold action to expose surveillan­ce activity, which our leaders should have exposed themselves and that we as Americans had a right to know.

Snowden paid close attention to the treatment that earlier whistleblo­wers had endured, such as Thomas Drake and his colleagues. They raised their concerns about a corrupt surveillan­ce program at NSA. They went to their superiors, to the NSA general counsel, to the Defense Department Inspector General Office, and eventually to both the Senate and the House intelligen­ce committees. The Department of Defense Inspector General Office violated its confidenti­ality agreement and gave their names to the FBI as “leakers” — a false accusation.

As a result, the FBI sent armed tactical squads to invade their homes. They faced possible criminal prosecutio­n for years. The trauma of those events still haunts them and their families. Furthermor­e, Drake faced 10 trumped-up felony counts, which could have sent him to prison for life. Over four years later, on the eve of his espionage trial, the case fell apart, and the federal judge who presided excoriated the Department of Justice for its work. In court, he chided the prosecutor­s and wondered what had happened to the “adult supervisio­n” at the department.

Snowden saw what happened to his predecesso­r whistleblo­wers and chose a different way forward: a path that he saw as the only option to expose the wrongdoing that he knew a great deal about but about which Americans knew nothing. Had he not done so, we would not have learned of the massive surveillan­ce program that the NSA had launched, which was affecting the privacy of millions of Americans. We certainly would not have known about the NSA’s activities because despite the abuses and overreach of surveillan­ce, the documents were buried under the cloak of classifica­tion. The top intelligen­ce chief of the nation, James Clapper, lied about the very existence of the program while testifying under oath at a Senate hearing.

Eventually the president responded to the public outcry in response to Snowden’s disclosure­s and ended some of the surveillan­ce abuses. In doing so, he claimed that the reforms were in the works before Snowden’s revelation­s. There is no evidence that this was true. In fact, Clapper’s lies to Congress suggest the opposite.

Edward Snowden courageous­ly spoke up and exposed what the NSA was doing and how its leaders were lying to the American people. It was the obligation of Congress, the president, and our national security agencies to provide a safe channel for his concerns. They failed. It is time President Trump recognizes the failures of previous administra­tions and pardon this idealistic and patriotic citizen.

Snowden’s truth-telling and civil disobedien­ce provided critical informatio­n about what our government was doing to us, and supposedly for us, without our knowledge or consent.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States