Edward Snowden, a computer expert and former CIA systems administrator, released confidential Government documents to the press about the existence of Government surveillance programmes. According to many legal experts and the US Government, his actions violated the Espionage Act of 1917. Yet, despite breaking the law, Snowden argued he had a moral obligation to act. Do you agree that Snowden’s actions were ethically justified even if legally prohibited? Why or why not? Make an argument by weighing his duty to inform the public against his breach of law.
1. Snowden’s disclosures of mass surveillance programmes
Snowden’s disclosures of mass surveillance programmes pose the classic dilemma of individual conscience versus legal obligation.
2. The duty to inform the public
The duty to inform the public rests on democratic principles: informed citizens are essential for accountability of power.
3. Against this
Against this, he violated the Espionage Act and his oath of secrecy, undermining rule of law and institutional trust.
4. Utilitarian reasoning: exposing surveillance may have
Utilitarian reasoning: exposing surveillance may have served public debate, but benefits are broad, uncertain, and diffuse.
5. Deontologically
Deontologically, truth-telling and transparency are duties, yet so are confidentiality, loyalty, and respecting lawful obligations.
6. Whistleblowing is ethically justified when harm
Whistleblowing is ethically justified when harm is grave, evidence is credible, internal remedies have failed, and disclosure is proportionate.
7. Snowden bypassed internal channels and released
Snowden bypassed internal channels and released classified material to foreign media indiscriminately, weakening his ethical justification.
8. National security is a legitimate state
National security is a legitimate state interest, but secret surveillance requires independent oversight, judicial control, and accountability.
9. Balanced verdict: he was morally right
Balanced verdict: he was morally right to raise concerns, but ethically flawed in method, scale, and indiscriminate disclosure.
Leave a Reply