Will State Department Condemn The UK For Using Terror Laws To Stifle Journalism?

from the it's-done-so-with-others dept

For example, in January 2012, in response to Ethiopia jailing award-winning journalist Eskinder Nega, the State Department expressed “concern that the application of anti-terrorism laws can sometimes undermine freedom of expression and independent media.” Again in June State Department released a statement saying the US “The Ethiopian government has used the Anti-Terrorism Proclamation to jail journalists and opposition party members for peacefully exercising their freedoms of expression and association.” The 2012 State Department human rights report on Turkey criticizes the country for imprisoning “scores of journalists…most charged under antiterror laws or for connections to an illegal organization.” In April 2013, the State Department cited Burundi for imprisoning radio journalist Hassan Ruvakuki and three of his colleagues for “acts of terrorism.” Just last month, in response to respected Moroccan journalist Ali Anouzla being arrested under an anti-terror law for linking to a Youtube video, the State Department said, “We are concerned with the government of Morocco’s decision to charge Mr. Anouzla. We support freedom of expression and of the press, as we say all the time, universal rights that are an indispensable part of any society.”

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community. Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis. While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

We wrote earlier about the incredible situation in the UK, in which the government there is making the ridiculous argument that it was appropriate to detain Glenn Greenwald's partner David Miranda at Heathrow under an anti-terrorism law because his journalistic activities qualify as terrorism because they might "influence a government." It seems fairly obvious to most rational observers, that the UK is redefining anti-terrorism laws to stifle journalism it doesn't like.Trevor Timm, over at the Freedom of the Press Foundation wonders if the US State Department will condemn the UK for this activity , noting a long history of the State Department condemning countries who use anti-terror laws to stifle journalism.So now when a close ally is doingthe same thing -- but it's in an effort to stifle journalism the US probably doesn't much like either -- will the State Department react the same way? A reporter for The Guardian, Dan Roberts, apparently asked the White House that question , and White House spokesperson Jay Carney gave one of those "I'll have to get back to you" kind of answers, which suggests no intention of actually answering the question. Hopefully Roberts and other reporters will continue asking the question until an actual answer is given.

Filed Under: david miranda, schedule 7, state department, terrorism, uk