Investigative journalism is vital for democracy as state surveillance increases
|
Version 0 of 1. For those inclined to think that the series of surveillance scandals and leaks over the past two years are unlikely to have much of an impact, it is worth recalling that, up until a little over 30 years ago, the British government denied the very existence of a spying organisation called GCHQ. As investigative journalist Duncan Campbell described in the Intercept yesterday, in a compelling account of a life spent chasing Britain’s spies out of the shadows, in the 70s and 80s even talking about GCHQ, let alone investigating and reporting on it, could get you followed, arrested and jailed. We’ve come a long way; not only is GCHQ namechecked in the news on a daily basis (thanks in large part to Edward Snowden), but for the past year it has been on a charm offensive, trying to revive its tarnished reputation. There appear to be no limits to what governments will seek to do under the pretext of countering terrorism. The degree of transparency that exists around US and UK secret surveillance agencies NSA and GCHQ exists in large part due to the tenacity of Campbell and his contemporaries; it was Campbell who wrote the first ever story about GCHQ, revealed the existence of NSA spying outpost Menwith Hill in North Yorkshire (now a global centre for planned cyberwar), exposed the construction of a British spy satellite, Zircon, and reported on the deployment of mass-communications surveillance practices by the British government. It is hard to underestimate the impact that the work of Campbell and other investigative journalists had on the evolution of law and accountability around British spy agencies. Without a doubt, the stories published by journalists working on NSA and GCHQ surveillance have acted as catalysts for legislation, parliamentary inquiries, resignations and greater public scrutiny of the acts committed by intelligence agencies across the world in the name of democracy and national security. Related: Germany halts treason inquiry into journalists after protests One of the most prominent of Campbell’s modern-day heirs – and most robust defenders of his legacy – is German news site Netzpolitik. In news that shocked its vocal and passionate community of internet supporters, it was revealed last week that Netzpolitik reporters and co-founders Markus Beckedahl and Andre Meister had been placed under investigation for treason by Germany’s federal attorney general, Harald Range. Their crime? Publishing details about surveillance programmes operated by the German secret service. A recipient of numerous awards, Netzpolitik is one of the most well-regarded German-language news blogs, and has been tirelessly reporting on technology, digital rights and politics since 2002. Netzpolitik has been at the forefront of the coverage of the Snowden revelations. The organisation for which I work, Privacy International, has also conducted a joint investigation with the site, exposing how the Ethiopian government purchased German-made surveillance technologies to spy on its citizens. The Ethiopian government has reportedly told the BBC: “This is nothing new to respond to”. We know Beckedahl and Meister to be dynamic and dedicated reporters with high journalistic ethics. Putting aside the absurd contention that a digital news site could be responsible for seriously prejudicing the national security of Germany – as Meister asserted, “Germany won’t be invaded because of our reporting” – this prosecution raised serious concerns about the future of investigative reporting in an era of increasing state surveillance. It is all the more worrying that this is happening in Germany, a country with a recent record of promoting greater accountability for the exercise of surveillance powers. In a welcome sign of cooler heads prevailing, Angela Merkel – who herself reported that she was put under unlawful surveillance – supported the decision to suspend the investigation pending an external assessment, as well as the justice minister’s decision to sack Range, the attorney general responsible. Nevertheless, the head of German intelligence services Hans-Georg Maassen, has defended the idea of criminal prosecution of journalists for investigative reporting. Preventing the publication of secret or classified documents is necessary “to continue the fight against extremism and terrorism,” Maassen said, using the same justification offered in June for the surveillance of children’s internet usage in British schools. There appear to be no limits to what governments will seek to do under the pretext of countering terrorism. If Netzpolitik and other heirs to Campbell’s legacy are silenced, we will never know just how far those limits stretch. |