The charity Public Concern at Work (PCaW) and other civil society groups are to campaign against plans to replace the Official Secrets Act with a new Espionage Act that could see whistleblowers and journalists jailed for up to 14 years.
The Law Commission on behalf of the Government drew up draft proposals published on February 2. For blowing the whistle on sensitive information, maximum sentences for breaching Official Secrets Act style offences are proposed to be increased from two years to 14 years in prison. According to PCaW, the Espionage Act puts whistleblowing and leaks of information where government wrongdoing is exposed in the same category as spying.
The consultation on the 326-page document by the Law Commission runs to April 3.
Public Concern at Work Chief Executive Cathy James said: “A combination of an increase in the prison term, denying whistleblowers a public interest defense and viewing whistleblowing in the same light as espionage with no need to prove damage, represents a crackdown on whistleblowing within Government. In addition, the proposals are unbalanced. It is interesting to see that the Government have amended the Digital Economy Bill to include a public interest defense for journalists disclosing information and publication of that information, yet the current consultation rejects the inclusion of a public interest defense in the Official Secrets Act.”
“Possibly the most dangerous proposal from the consultation is extending prosecution to sensitive information that could damage the ‘economic wellbeing of the United Kingdom as it relates to national security’. This vague proposal opens the threat of prosecution to a whistleblower who reveals sensitive economic statistics, which are hardly states secrets. The Government is conflating national security issues with a desire to ensure embarrassing news stories do not see the light of day.”
Martha Spurrier, Director of human rights campaign group Liberty, said: “It’s disturbing that the Law Commission considers a single meeting adequate consultation to inform such drastic and dangerous proposals. We don’t – and we will be submitting a thorough response to the public consultation. These oppressive plans have no place in a democracy. They would skew the balance even further in favour of state secrecy, irrespective of potentially profound public interest. By increasing the prospect of prosecutions for revelations that are merely embarrassing or inconvenient, they would silence whistle-blowers and gag our press.
“This is the latest hypocritical move from a Government intent on operating in the shadows while monitoring every move the rest of us make. When the agencies’ illegal mass surveillance was exposed by Snowden’s courageous actions, this Government responded with the eye-wateringly authoritarian Investigatory Powers Act. That law makes it illegal to disclose even the mere existence of warrants to intercept people’s communications, meaning those who are unlawfully spied on, including journalists, will never know about it – unless whistle-blowers come forward.”
The Law Commission meanwhile spoke in terms of ensuring that the law is keeping pace with the challenges of the 21st century. Law Commissioner Professor David Ormerod QC said: “The Law Commission welcomed the opportunity to conduct this rigorous, independent review of the law around the protection of data, including the Official Secrets Acts. We have made a number of provisional conclusions as to how the legislation could be improved that we believe will enhance the protection that is currently afforded to official information.”
Visit http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/protection-of-official-data/.
To date, the Official Secrets Act 1911 still provides the principal legal protection in the UK against espionage.
