Statement of Sibel Edmonds
Before the House Committee on Government Reform,
Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and Internal Relations
March 2, 2005
Emerging Threats: Overclassification and Pseudo-classification
Good afternoon, my name is Sibel Edmonds. I have been invited to provide
you with testimony today regarding my direct experience with the use of
excessive secrecy, rare privileges, and over-classification by the
Department of Justice against me during the past three years. Thank you
for giving me this opportunity. I believe that my case clearly
illustrates how the government uses secrecy laws and classification to
avoid accountability, to cover up problems and wrongdoing, and to gain
unfair legal advantage in court.
I began working for the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) as a
language specialist for several Middle Eastern languages starting shortly
after 9/11, and was granted Top Secret Clearance. During my work, I
became aware of problems within the translation unit involving criminal
conduct against our national interests, potential espionage, serious
security breaches threatening our intelligence, intentional
mistranslation, and blocking of intelligence. I was asked, and later
ordered, to refrain from reporting these allegations. I reported them,
together with evidence, to higher management within the bureau. They
refused to take any action, and again, they asked me not to pursue them.
I then took these issues and evidence to the Department of Justice Office
of the Inspector General and to the Senate Judiciary Committee, because I
believed that according to our laws these were the appropriate steps to
take in this situation. As a result, I was retaliated against, was ordered
to submit to a polygraph, and had my home computer confiscated. Finally,
in March 2002 I was fired. The only explanation I received for getting
fired was 'for the convenience of the government.'
In March 2002, the Senate Judiciary Committee began investigating my case
and allegations, and in June and July 2002, during two unclassified
briefings with the staff of Senators Grassley and Senator Leahy, the FBI
publicly confirmed all of my core allegations. These two Senators issued
public statements and letters regarding these confirmations and my case,
demanding expedited investigation by the Inspector General and response
from the FBI. These letters and statements were widely disseminated in
the media and on the Internet; including on the Senators' own websites.
When the judge overseeing my legal cases asked the government to produce
any unclassified materials that was relevant to the substance of my
allegations, the government took a truly extraordinary step: it moved to
retroactively classify these letters, statements, and news releases that
had been public for almost two years. It is quite clear that the
government's motivation was not to protect national security, but rather
to protect itself from embarrassment and accountability. Senator Grassley
characterized this retroactive classification as 'ludicrous,' and 'gagging
the congress.'
However, the Congress complied. Only after this highly unusual retroactive
classification was challenged in court by POGO, a government watchdog
organization, did the Department of Justice reverse itself and declare
that this information was not considered classified and a danger to
national security after all. I would like to request that these letters
from Senators Grassley and Leahy be included in the record of today's
hearing.
In March 2002, the Department of Justice's Office of the Inspector General
began investigating my allegations, and in July 2004, after almost two
years delay, completed its investigation. The Department of Justice
immediately moved to classify the entire report and its findings. Six
months later, they allowed the Inspector General to release only an
unclassified version of its executive summary. This unclassified version
confirmed my core allegations; concluded that I was fired for reporting
misconduct; and stated that the FBI had failed to investigate the reported
espionage, even though other facts, witnesses and evidence supported my
allegations. I would like to request that the Inspector General's report
also be included in the record of today's hearing.
In the summer of 2002 I also began to pursue legal remedies to challenge
my unjust dismissal, and filed cases under First Amendment and Privacy
Act, and the Freedom of Information Act. Rather than respond to the
merits of my claim, in October 2002, Attorney General Ashcroft asserted a
rarely invoked 'State Secrets Privilege', arguing that the entire case
must be dismissed in the name of national security, even if my allegations
were correct. The Department of Justice asked the courts to throw out the
case without any hearings, depositions, or discovery. Even though the
Department of Justice's own Inspector General has confirmed the
seriousness of my allegations and concluded that I was fired for raising
them, the DOJ has continued to insist that my case cannot go forward
because it would jeopardize national security. So far, the DOJ has been
successful in this effort to silence me. In June 2004, the court ruled in
favor of this far-reaching assertion of the "state secrets privilege".
Currently I am appealing my case, and the Department of Justice is still
invoking the "state secrets privilege" and arguing that everything about
my issues is covered by classification.
The government invoked the state secrets privilege a second time in an
attempt to block me from being deposed in a case brought by families of
those killed on September 11 against Saudi individuals and entities
alleged to have financed al-Qaeda. The government insisted that almost
every single question that the families wished to ask me would require the
disclosure of classified information.
The problems I have reported have serious consequences to our national
security; and have already been confirmed by the Inspector General's
report and the inquiry of Senators Grassley and Leahy. Translation units
are the frontline in gathering, translating, and disseminating
intelligence. A warning in advance of the next terrorist attack may, and
probably will, come in the form of a message or document in a foreign
language that will have to be translated. If an attack then occurs, which
could have been prevented by acting on information in such a message, who
will tell family members of the new terrorist attack victims that nothing
more could have been done? There will be no excuse that we did not know,
because we do know.
Yet, knowing full well the seriousness of these confirmed issues and
problems, rather than addressing them the FBI and the Department of
Justice spend time and effort to cover them up by over use of secrecy and
excessive classification. Contrary to their claims, they seem to be far
more concerned with avoiding accountability than protecting our national
security. I believe that my case clearly illustrates the federal
government's capricious use of secrecy laws and classification to cover up
problems and wrongdoing, and to avoid accountability, regardless of the
damage to our national security. It demonstrates as well how excessive
secrecy and pseudo classification can be used as retaliation tactics
against national security whistleblowers.
This type of excessive classification and the effort to expand the
"statesecrets privilege" does not increase our national security but
actually makes us less safe and it impedes oversight of the executive
branch, as part of the checks and balances demanded by our Constitution.
Thank you again for inviting me to testify today. You are the first
Congressional Committee after three years to request my testimony and hear
my story. I believe this testimony is a good first step in examining this
situation but what is really needed is an actual Congressional
investigation. Therefore, with respect for your critical role in our
Constitution's system of checks and balances, I request that you be the
first Congressional Committee to investigate not just my case but what is
going on over at the FBI and the Justice Department regarding the very
serious problem of over-classification and the abuse of secrecy. Thank
you.
No comments:
Post a Comment