New York judge John G. Koeltl has dismissed a law USA If this intelligence operation was revealed.
Two lawyers and two American journalists during the government of Donald Trump (2017-2021), the US agency and the owner of the Spanish company UC Global, SL, based in Jerez de la Frontera, who dealt with security in the security in the Ecuadorian embassy in London during the government of Rafael Correa. The plaintiffs were victims of espionage and their registered mobile phones when they visited the founder of Wikileaks – today freedom – who took refuge in the legation between 2012 and 2019 to avoid being extradited.
The ruling of the Magistrate of the New York Court, to which the country has had access, attends to the request of the former director of the CIA and the Law of the Central Agency of Intelligence of 1949 so as not to provide any information “because it could cause serious damage to United States security. ” “The final claim of the plaintiffs is dismissed under the privilege of the State Secret,” concludes the sentence.
PRIVILEGIES AND NATIONAL SECURITY
The former head of the Intelligence Service, renowned formerly and architect of the nuclear agreement with Iran in 2015, gave Koeltl a classified statement, already closed doors. An eight folios document, which no one except the judge has had access, in which he asked him to recognize these “privileges to protect sources, methods and activities” of the CIA that had any relationship with this case. Weeks before, the magistrate had resolved that they visited the founder of Wikileaks during his stay in the Ecuadorian diplomatic legation, rights that guarantees the fourth amendment of the Constitution.
The when he designed his defense against the US extradition request for revealing secret information of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. weeks later and is being investigated for various crimes by a National Court Court.
For the Court, the US government has shown that the privilege of the State Secret is applicable. “Contrary to what the plaintiffs claim, the Government applies the correct criterion in their public declaration.” And he states that “there is a reasonable danger that the revelation of the specific facts in litigation endangers national security.”
The sentence quotes the classified statement delivered by the former director of the CIA in which he detailed why demand the intelligence agency to confirm or deny if he has information regarding the demand could threaten national security. “The Government persuasively argues that demanding that the CIA recognizes whether or not certain information collection activities in a foreign embassy could have serious repercussions for the national security of the United States, although Assange no longer lives in the Global Embassy and UC and Do not provide security there. ”
The New York judge feeds that William J. Burns’ recent relief at the head of the CIA and his replace former director.
Secret and public domain
After analyzing different assumptions and sentences on the government’s right to hide in the State Secret, the magistrate concludes that “contrary to the claim of the plaintiffs, there is no viable way of segregating the information not privileged in this case. The object of this litigation – if the CIA participated or not in the behavior alleged in the claim of the plaintiffs – is subject to the privilege of the Secrets of State in its entirety. Any response to demand allegations would reveal privileged information. ” In this way, the judge seems to close the door to any claim or appeal of the victims of espionage because the defendants could not confirm or deny any of the facts.
On the argument of the plaintiffs that the facts denounced are already in the public domain having been revealed and published by this newspaper, Judge Koeltl alleges that the US Supreme Court has argued that “sometimes the information that has become In the public domain, it can, however, enter the field of privilege of state secrets. ” The magistrate asks the plaintiffs if they wish to continue their complaint against Morales, since this ruling refers only to the CIA. The owner of UC Global, SL did not appear in the cause and the accusation against Pompeo was previously filed.
The claim, in addition to denouncing the espionage, sought that the judge authorize the discovery (The declassification of the operation of the CIA), according to legal sources. A secret mission during Donald Trump’s first government whose details (audios, videos, emails and documents) were that the victims of espionage presented before the court as evidence.
