Garzon, famous from prosecuting Argentinian dictator Jorge Videla and other high profile cases in Spain, released a statement. He no longer represents Edward Snowden.
In an update WikiLeaks twitted ' WikiLeaks has acquired a US attorney for Mr. Snowden who will be named in due course.' Now it could well make sense to have an American legal advisor, but Baltasar Garzón never shies away from a high profile case no matter the jurisdiction involved. Things look bad for Edward Snowden!
Full statement which is a bit puzzling:
This serves to state that the Law firm ILOCAD has decided not to represent Mr. Snowden, whose whereabouts are unknown. We continue to represent Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks as senior legal counsel in the defence of the fundamental right to freedom of information and expression. In this vein, we are satisfied with the recently approved draft resolution by the Committee Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly. It states that those who disclose criminal acts in the public interest should be protected from retaliation and persecution from those who commit them.
I enjoyed this photo
In the background Sarah Harrison who is currently
travellingstuck in Moscow with Edward Snowden.Well, he is stuck in Russia. It seems he didn't plan well. Going to Hong Kong was not the greatest idea.
Maduro, venezuela's prime minister is currently in visit to Moscow… If Snowden has a free-apss by ecuatorian authorities couldn't he "ask" or "be offered" a lift to south america… ?
The key phrase obviously is "disclose criminal acts in the public interest". Running a secret service within the framework of the applicable law is not a crime, however despicable certain operations may be. And twarting a secret service may not be viewed "in the public interest" by everyone.
I'd say he is lucky not having Garzón. He is well know for messing up everything he touches. Lots of people have been released because of his bad investigations.
Also, he is not of a great memory here in Catalonia. He ordered many pro-independence people to be arrested before 1992 Olympic Games. Many of them denounced tortures by the police. He did NOTHING. Years later, the European Human Rights Court found him guilty of not investigating them.
The statement makes sense. The US has laws protecting whistleblowers but it's going to revoke Snowden's passport for blowing the whistle? That's illegal retaliation, undue restraint, and endangerment.
+Elizabeth Gomez-Mayo Did you read the previous comments? His passport was not revoked "for whistle blowing". According to US law, whistle blowing is "disclosing criminal acts in the public interest". Revealing state secrets because you disagree with the way certain info is obtained, is tempting — and to some heroic — but it is not whistle blowing. The NSA is a federal organisation and their actions are — sadly — within their mandate.
Well, that's where we will disagree. Revoking the passport of an American citizen that has chosen to act in the best interest of the American people (just because you're in charge and you fell like it) is not ok. As an American, and therefore the employer of the fed, I'm telling you it's not ok.
By the way, it is a criminal act for this government to illegally search and/or seize our information. period.
"The way certain information is obtained" is exactly the problem. The search and seizure clause of the 4th amendment to the Constitution of the United States forbids exactly this type of #DataTrawling. He definitely exposed the government doing something it is not permitted. And the government is angry and retaliating, no matter how they spin it.
+Elizabeth Gomez-Mayo I am sorry but no one gave Snowden the authority to do what he did. Whether you like it or not the US government has acted legally. There is no evidence of any illegal acts and no court case that says that any laws were broken.
And the last time I checked neither the Guardian, nor Hong Kong, nor Russia are the American people
Then we disagree, at least in part. (I'm in agreement that other countries are not American and I'm not sure where you were going with that part, but I obviously agree with you there.) However, as I explained already, the United States government's actions, namely collecting data without a warrant, is actually illegal, whether you want it to be or not.
btw, there are hundreds of cases detailing how wrong it is for the government to conduct warrantless searches, so you are wrong about that, too, unfortunately.
Thanks for information, I reshare this post!
In Snowden's current situation it's a real shame that he doesn't have an expert lawyer but has to rely on one Wikileaks helper..
I totally agree.+Max Huijgen. A really shame!
+Max Huijgen how is it a shame? It is his situation is his own doing. Hearing his father he wonders what exactly is going on with his son
Lots of people who need a very good lawyer found themselves in a situation they at least partially created themselves +Grey Grymm
In this case however Snowden got stuck as Ecuador didn't back its own London embassy.