Welcome to Gaia! ::

Perhaps, the first thing that comes to a person’s mind when reading about the publication of confidential documents of the government is that ‘we are a country of law’. As such, following this logic, publishing such documents shouldn’t be tolerated and be punished and prosecuted.

The publication and revelation of such documents is, indeed, not precisely legal. The prosecution of these documents such as those of the nature that were recently exposed by Snowden, Bradley Manning or groups such as Anonymous or Wikileaks seems to be the increasingly common approach to this problem. However, in my opinion, this method to deal with the so called ‘whistle-blowers’ is an erroneous one.

Whilst the fact that the publication of these documents does not follow the law cannot be debated, the argument that the people revealing these should be prosecuted due to the fact that ‘we are a country of laws’ does not justify the prosecution of these people. Supporting transparency within governments and the control of these, is something which I believe should be encouraged for a successful application of justice against illegal actions taken by the government. An example of these ‘actions’ could be those that were recently exposed by Snowden. Yes, currently revealing these things is just as illegal as those being revealed to the public, but this is does not justify the actions done by the government. By focusing on the method of how these things were revealed we are only ignoring the real debate about the control that should be imposed on government actions. Especially when individual privacy and national and international laws are breached, this is an important note to take. Rather than analysing the nature of what is revealed and justifying it, the debate is turned on the legality of the means.

The nature of what is exposed reveals a much deeper problem that follows the trend seen in recent years for the control of the public. This is a particularly terrifying thing, as it can lead all too easily to what could be called a ‘police state’ or a totalitarian state which is not controlled by the majority of the population and can easily bypass the legal limits imposed. Think of Kafka’s ‘The Trial’ or Orwell’s ‘1984’. It should be the duty of the judiciary, and by extent the law, to protect the people that reveal documents which demonstrate illegal actions taken by the government. As well as to control and punish these actions rather than to prosecute the people revealing these for the means used.

Whistle-blowing is not something that should be prosecuted, and instead encouraged. As it allows an easy way to learn of and possibly control these illegal actions. By prosecuting it and turning the debate towards it, with the ‘we are a country of law’ argument all too easily heard, it is condemned and prosecuted. Leaving the task of exposing these things to the limited amount of people willing to risk their lives and even their physical integrity, following the alleged treatment received by Bradley Manning after being arrested and as exile is an all too common result.

It should be the task of any society to not encourage brutality and illegal actions taken by the government. Nor to ignore the brutality that easily results from these. Instead, rather than excusing it, it should be a duty to protect the revelation of these type of documents which expose illegal actions. Despite the fact the status quo nationally may punish whistle-blowing and transparency rather than take a stand against illegal actions. The fact that something is a law does not necessarily mean that the thing it rules on is correct or justified, and if the case is that it is not justified then the law should be changed to make way for progress. Even if change in favour of the control of government and transparency can be extremely hard to achieve through legal means. Despite this, regardless of what the state should or shouldn’t do, it is clear that it holds no interest in transparency. As such, hope or advice is ultimately useless, and it is something that should instead be forced upon the state.

Yes, indeed. It does showcase the incredible degree of that, although I think that an awful number of other things also show how much ignorance is prevalent for people. And yes, I agree. If only such a thing and change would actually be possible in this sort of society...