Slashdot Mirror
Russia Plans To Extend Edward Snowden's Asylum
mendax writes "The New York Times reports, 'Russia plans to extend its offer of asylum to Edward J. Snowden beyond August, a Russian lawmaker said Friday at the World Economic Forum ... The lawmaker, Aleksei K. Pushkov, chairman of the foreign affairs committee in Russia's lower house of Parliament, hinted during a panel discussion that the extension of temporary refugee status for Mr. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, might be indefinite. "He will not be sent out of Russia," Mr. Pushkov said. "It will be up to Snowden."'"
Snowden said yesterday that going back to the U.S. is not an option because of the country's poor whistleblower protections "which through a failure in law did not cover national security contractors like [him]." He added, "This is especially frustrating, because it means there’s no chance to have a fair trial, and no way I can come home and make my case to a jury."
Nope, that law does exactly was it's supposed to do - protect the guilty.
Both you and "ackthpt" should be ashamed of yourself.
Unlike Mr. Edward Snowden, none of you have the guts to do the right thing, and yet, after the personal sacrifices Mr. Snowden has gone through - may even turn out to be a lifelong exile from the country he loves so much - you guys post smart-ass comments as if you are some how "better" than Mr. Snowden.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
The US does have some protections for whistleblowers, but none he can use - national security information is specifically excluded, as is the public interest defence. Any trial would consist of this:
Judge: "Did you release classified information?"
Defense: "Only in the public interest."
Prosecution: "Public interest defense is not considered a valid cause for releasing classified information."
Judge: "Guilty. I sentence you to six hundred years in maximum security."
There isn't really anything he could say. That's even if the trial were fair - and it wouln't be. Chances are almost all the documentation will be classified so high neither he nor his lawyers would be permitted to see it, so he'll be defending against evidence he can't even know about. The only good thing for him is that he was a civilian contractor, so he at least would get a trial, rather than a military tribunal.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01...
His response should be "you first".
It's BS that Snowden is unwilling to come back to the US to stand trial. I'm sure there are plenty of great lawyers who would work pro bono to take his landmark case, and if he was willing to fight, he might be able to affect more change to the government spying program and achieve the goals he set out to reach.
Even great lawyers can't do anything when the evidence is hidden or heavily redacted in the name of national security. "Your honor, we'd like to introduce this document showing that the NSA was overstepping its legal bounds" "Objection! That document is classified top secret, so instead you can use this redacted version that is completely black except for the words "We", "love", and "freedom".
It's especially difficult when the lawyer is going up against an agency that has already shown itself willing to lie directly to congress -- supposedly the people that are overseeing the agency. If they don't mind lying to congress, why wouldn't they lie to a court?
With the deck stacked that heavily against him, what hope is there for any sort of fair trial? Esepcially when he's guilty of what he's accused of -- stealing and releasing classified documents. Without whistleblower protection laws to support him, the reason he stole the documents is immaterial.