Discussion

Journalists should not be prosecuted for publishing state secrets that are leaked in the public interest.

3 replies [Last post]

Journalists should not be prosecuted for publishing state secrets that are leaked in the public interest.

Alex Helling's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Sep 2011
Posts: 770
Applause: 48

Israeli reporter Uri Blau has avoided jail through a plea bargain. Uri Blau has admitted to possessing classified Israeli Defence Forces documents including secret intelligence but as part of the admission it is accepted that his intent was not to harm Israeli national security. Uri Blau is the reporter, working for Haaretz, who was given military documents by Anat Kamm, a conscript who was working in Israel’s Central Command, and published a number of articles based on them. Kamm herself has already been sentenced to 54 months in prison. The case is particularly worrying as an attempt by the Israeli state to suppress the press and its freedoms. The things that Kamm and Blau revealed included Israeli security forces having  killed two Palestinian militants in contravention of a Israeli Supreme Court ruling on such assassinations – therefore a piece of journalism that was pretty squarely in the public interest. The Jerusalem Journalists Association said in response to the plea bargain “It would have been preferable if this case would have ended in the withdrawal of the indictments and the regulation of the matter in order to allow journalists to do their job without fear. The outcome of the plea bargain will hurt the public for which the journalists work for."

Debatabase debate: This House believes that the leaking of military documents by Anat Kamm was justified http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/free-speech-debate/house-believes-leaking-military-documents-anat-kamm-was-justified

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/05/israeli-reporter-military-secrets-jail

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/haaretz-journalist-uri-blau-to-admit-to-holding-secret-idf-info-in-plea-bargain-1.449029

45 weeks 1 day ago
KateDebate's picture
Offline
Joined: 27 Mar 2012
Posts: 146
Applause: 11

Alex Helling wrote:

The things that Kamm and Blau revealed included Israeli security forces having  killed two Palestinian militants in contravention of a Israeli Supreme Court ruling on such assassinations – therefore a piece of journalism that was pretty squarely in the public interest.

So this is a case of the army breaking the law and then attempting to prosecute whistleblowers and so silence anyone else who might be tempted to do the same?

45 weeks 1 day ago
booji's picture
Offline
Joined: 20 Mar 2012
Posts: 369
Applause: 26

Possibly, but Kamm did take several thousand documents, most of which were not related to the assassinations and presumably are not really things that can be considered to be 'in the public interest'. Who knows how things would have gone if she had only taken those few that were related to things that are illegal.

45 weeks 1 day ago
Alex Helling's picture
Offline
Joined: 13 Sep 2011
Posts: 770
Applause: 48

No idea whether things would have been any different but as mentioned in the debate "In Israel there is a military censor which newspapers submit articles that might affect national security to and that censor takes out anything it believes to be harmful to state security. All the materials that were published by Haaretz went first through Haaretz’s editors and then this military censor" so it is unlikely that anything that could not be considered in the 'public interest' was ever published, there were afterall only a few articles published not a whole load of documents put online a la wikileaks.

45 weeks 22 hours ago
Syndicate content