Page 139 - Freedom in the world_Neat

Classification of information. In March 2003, a year and a half after 9/11, President Bush
signed Executive Order 13292. Despite the tradition of open government established by
FOIA and the Sunshine Act, this order considerably expanded government secrecy by
giving the executive branch the power to delay the release of classified documents and
reclassify previously released information, broadening the exceptions to declassification
rules and lowering the standards under which material could be exempted from
release.21 The result, according to one source, was that the number of documents
classified jumped from 8.7 million in 2001 to 14.2 million in 2005, an increase of about
60 percent in three years.22 According to the New York Times, even decades-old
information is being reclassified, and attempts to retrieve information under FOIA have
become slower and more burdensome.23 Although in the immediate aftermath of 9/11
journalists generally accepted some national security or war-related restrictions, many have
since become concerned that the new rules are also restricting access to normal political
and economic information.24
In March 2007 the House of Representatives passed a number of measures that, among
other things, require government agencies to respond more promptly to FOIA requests,
reverse a 2001 Bush decision that protected presidential records from public scrutiny, and
increase protection for whistleblowers. These proposed laws have yet to be discussed in
the Senate, and the White House has warned that they may be vetoed.

Despite the new restrictions on FOIA, reporters have been able to use leaks or still-
permitted FOIA requests to obtain a number of important documents about the
government’s war on terrorism. These include memorandums outlining policies for the
severe treatment of prisoners detained in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Furthermore, the CIA in 2007 declassified thousands of files from the cold-war era that
detailed agency discussions concerning assassinations, coup plots, and other embarrassing
programs.

Crackdown on leaked information. Even as the amount of classified information has grown,
the press has, on occasion, obtained highly sensitive information from government officials
in the form of both sanctioned and unsanctioned leaks. Particularly in recent years, many
journalists have been less willing to heed administration calls to withhold certain stories in
the interest of a patriotic and united front against terrorism. Tensions have emerged
between the Bush administration and media practitioners who have chosen to resume
publishing exposés based on leaked classified documents.
In the past, journalists who received information legally were able to publish it without
prosecution or reprisal. Yet as early as 2002, then Attorney General John Ashcroft was
promising to tighten existing laws against leaking, and some within the administration had
called for leakers to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act when they were believed to
have jeopardized national security. The act requires proof of intent to harm the United
States or aid a foreign government and has therefore never been used to formally
prosecute a journalist. But by 2006, at the behest of some conservative journalists,
politicians, and government officials, it was increasingly used as a way to threaten
reporters and media outlets that published stories based on leaked secrets.25
Most of these threats have been directed at the New York Times, due to a series of
December 2005 stories revealing that the National Security Agency was tracking terrorism
suspects by monitoring domestic telephone calls without a warrant. President Bush called

Page 139 of 168