December 14, 2003

FOR TELLING THE TRUTH

By Norman Solomon

Few Americans have heard of Katharine Gun, a former British intelligence employee facing charges that she violated the Official Secrets Act. So far, the American press has ignored her. But the case raises profound questions about democracy and the public's right to know on both sides of the Atlantic.

Ms. Gun's legal peril began in Britain on March 2, when the Observer newspaper exposed a highly secret memorandum by a top U.S. National Security Agency official. Dated Jan. 31, the memo outlined surveillance of a half-dozen delegations with swing votes on the U.N. Security Council, noting a focus on "the whole gamut of information that could give U.S. policy-makers an edge in obtaining results favorable to U.S. goals" - support for war on Iraq.

The NSA memo said that the agency had started a "surge" of spying on diplomats at the United Nations in New York, including wiretaps of home and office telephones along with reading of e-mails. The targets were delegations from six countries considered to be pivotal - Mexico, Chile, Angola, Cameroon, Guinea and Pakistan - for the war resolution being promoted by the United States and Britain.

The scoop caused headlines in much of the world, and sparked a furor in the "Middle Six" countries. The U.S. government and its British ally - revealed to be colluding in the U.N. surveillance caper - were put on the defensive.

A few days after the story broke, I contacted the man responsible for leaking the huge trove of secret documents about the Vietnam War known as the Pentagon Papers more than three decades ago. What was his assessment of the U.N. spying memo?

"This leak," Daniel Ellsberg replied, "is more timely and potentially more important than the Pentagon Papers." The exposure of the memo, he said, had the potential to block the invasion of Iraq before it began: "Truth-telling like this can stop a war."

Katharine Gun's truth-telling did not stop the war on Iraq, but it did make a difference. Some analysts cite the uproar from the leaked memo as a key factor in the U.S.-British failure to get Security Council approval of a pro-war resolution before the invasion began in late March.

The government of British Prime Minister Tony Blair quickly arrested Ms. Gun. In June, she formally lost her job as a translator at the top-secret Government Communications Headquarters in Gloucester. On Nov. 13, her name surfaced in the British news media when the Labor Party government dropped the other shoe, charging the 29-year-old woman with a breach of the Official Secrets Act.

She faces up to two years in prison if convicted.

Ms. Gun, who is free on bail and is to appear in court Jan. 19, has responded with measured eloquence. Disclosure of the NSA memo, she said Nov. 27, was "necessary to prevent an illegal war in which thousands of Iraqi civilians and British soldiers would be killed or maimed." And Ms. Gun reiterated something that she had said two weeks earlier: "I have only ever followed my conscience."

All the realpolitik in the world cannot preclude the exercise of the internal quality that most distinguishes human beings. Of all the differences between people and other animals, Charles Darwin observed, "the moral sense of conscience is by far the most important."

In this case, Ms. Gun's conscience fully intersected with the needs of democracy and a free press. The British and American people had every right to know that their governments were involved in a high-stakes dirty tricks campaign at the United Nations. For democratic societies, a timely flow of information is the lifeblood of the body politic.

As it happened, the illegal bugging of diplomats from three continents in Manhattan foreshadowed the illegality of the war that was to come. Shortly before the invasion began, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan pointed out that - in the absence of an authorizing resolution from the Security Council - an attack on Iraq would violate the U.N. Charter.

Ms. Gun's conspicuous bravery speaks louder than any rhetoric possibly could. Her actions confront Britons and Americans alike with difficult choices:

To what extent is the "special relationship" between the two countries to be based on democracy or duplicity? How much do we treasure the substance of civil liberties that make authentic public discourse distinct from the hollowness of secrecy and manipulation? How badly do we want to know what is being done in our names with our tax money? And why is it so rare that conscience takes precedence over expediency?

Press Release

Liberty takes up case of GCHQ whistleblower
13 Nov 2003

Liberty is acting for Katharine Gun, a former GCHQ civil servant who has today been charged with offences under the Official Secrets Act relating to public interest disclosures allegedly made in the run up to the Iraq War.

Katharine said:

"I worked for GCHQ as a translator until June 2003. I have been charged with offences under the Official Secrets Act. Any disclosures that may have been made were justified on the following grounds:

- because they exposed serious illegality and wrongdoing on the part of the US Government who attempted to subvert our own security services and

- to prevent wide-scale death and casualties among ordinary Iraqi people and UK forces in the course of an illegal war

No-one has suggested (nor could they), that any payment was sought or given for any alleged disclosures. I have only ever followed my conscience


Notes for editors:

This case is likely to put the legality of the Iraq War on trial.

The Attorney General advised on the legality of the war. This advice has yet to be put into the public domain but has been called into question by leading QCs on all sides of the political spectrum.

The same Attorney General personally consented to this prosecution.

It is clear that the Government must be uncertain about the wisdom of this prosecution. It has taken 6 months to decide to proceed to charge.

_________________


Press Release

GCHQ whistleblower was trying to 'save lives'
27 Nov 2003

Liberty is acting for Katharine Gun, a former GCHQ civil servant who has been charged with offences under the Official Secrets Act relating to public interest disclosures allegedly made in the run up to the Iraq War.

She was today granted unconditional bail until January 19. There will be a further appearance at Bow Street before the matter is transferred to Crown Court.

Katherine Gun made the following statement:

“I have today indicated to the court that I intend to plead not guilty to the charge that I face under the Official Secrets Act.

I will defend the charge against me on the basis that my actions were necessary to prevent an illegal war in which thousands of Iraqi civilians and British soldiers would be killed or maimed.

No-one has suggested (nor could they) that I sought or received any payment. I have only ever followed my conscience.

I have been heartened by the many messages of support and encouragement that I have received from Britain and around the world.”

Richard Norton-Taylor
Friday November 28, 2003
The Guardian

A former GCHQ official exposed an American plan to eavesdrop on members of the UN security council, to try to prevent an illegal war leading to the deaths of British soldiers and Iraqi civilians, magistrates were told yesterday.

Katharine Gun intends to deny breaching the Official Secrets Act, because she disclosed the information out of necessity.

Mrs Gun, 29, from Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, appeared at Bow Street magistrates court in central London where her counsel, Ben Emmerson QC, said the case raised important issues of law and disclosure.

He said GCHQ had imposed limits on what instructions she could give her defence lawyers, an action which was attacked by Amnesty International for being in breach of her human rights.

In a move which required the consent of Lord Goldsmith, the attorney general, Mrs Gun was charged two weeks ago, eight months after she was arrested. She was sacked from her job as a GCHQ translator in June.

She faces charges under section 1 of the Official Secrets Act, which states that any serving or former member of the security and intelligence agencies is guilty of an offence for disclosing "any information" about their work without official authority.

However, in a case brought by lawyers acting for the former MI5 officer David Shayler, the court of appeal last year ruled that the "necessity defence" was admissible under the Official Secrets Act in the event of an imminent threat to life and limb.

Mr Emmerson told the court that Mrs Gun "does not dispute that she was responsible for leaking emails".

He added: "The disclosure was made by her in a sincere attempt to prevent what she believed to be an unlawful war and to save the lives of British servicemen and women and Iraqi citizens."

In a statement read out after the hearing by her solicitor, James Welch, Mrs Gun said she would defend the charges against her on the basis that her actions were "necessary to prevent an illegal war in which thousands of Iraqi civilians and British soldiers would be killed or maimed".

She added: "I have only ever followed my conscience. I have been heartened by many messages of support and encouragement that I have received from Britons around the world."

Mrs Gun was arrested after the leak of a report that the US national security agency (NSA), America's equivalent of GCHQ, was conducting a "dirty tricks" operation.

The operation was directed against UN security council members as part of Washington's battle to win votes in favour of a war against Iraq.

The secret surveillance operation involved intercepting the home and office telephone calls and emails of delegates to the UN.

The NSA made clear that the particular targets of what was described as an eavesdropping "surge" were the delegates from Angola, Cameroon, Chile, Bulgaria, Guinea and Pakistan, the six crucial "swing votes" on the security council.

A memo sent by Frank Koza, a senior NSA official, said the information would be used "against" the key UN delegations.

Yesterday, senior district judge Timothy Workman granted Mrs Gun unconditional bail to return to Bow Street on January 19 for committal to a full crown court trial.