Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Security Your Rights Online Politics

Edward Snowden Files For Political Asylum In Russia 447

vikingpower writes "The official Russian Press agency Interfax has the scoop: Edward Snowden asks for political asylum in Russia (Google Translate). Russia Today, however, denies the news. Is this part of a clever disinformation move by Snowden, who reportedly is still in the Moscow airport Sheremetyevo 2?" The Washington Post is also reporting Snowden did apply for asylum in Russia. Snowden released a statement last night through Wikileaks, quoting: "For decades the United States of America has been one of the strongest defenders of the human right to seek asylum. Sadly, this right, laid out and voted for by the U.S. in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is now being rejected by the current government of my country. The Obama administration has now adopted the strategy of using citizenship as a weapon. Although I am convicted of nothing, it has unilaterally revoked my passport, leaving me a stateless person. Without any judicial order, the administration now seeks to stop me exercising a basic right. A right that belongs to everybody. The right to seek asylum."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Edward Snowden Files For Political Asylum In Russia

Comments Filter:
  • by mrsam ( 12205 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @08:16AM (#44163939) Homepage

    "Edward Snowden Files For Political Asylum In Russia"

    That was yesterday's news, sorry. Today's news, is that he's not [foxnews.com].

  • by cold fjord ( 826450 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @08:17AM (#44163949)

    Having a passport canceled doesn't effect citizenship. Snowden's statement is rubbish on that point.

    Prepared to issue one-entry travel document to Snowden: US [business-standard.com]

    "We reject - you've heard Assange say earlier that he's sort of marooned in Russia. That's not true. We're prepared to issue one-entry travel document. He's still a US citizen. He still enjoys the rights of his US citizenship, which include the right to a free and fair trial for the crimes he's been accused of," the State Department spokesperson, Patrick Ventrell, told reporters at his daily news conference yesterday.

    "We reject the notion that this is some sort of political prosecution. Indeed, it's not. These are serious crimes, serious violations of his obligations, and as somebody who had access to classified information, and so our position is that he needs to face a free and fair trial and not be a fugitive," Ventrell said.

  • Getting desperate? (Score:5, Informative)

    by ark1 ( 873448 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @08:20AM (#44163985)
    Apparently he withdrew [nbcnews.com] his asylum request after Putin asked him to stop leaking more secrets. Funny he would consider it in the first place knowing that Russians are likely much worst when it comes to surveillance of their own citizens. Can't see many nations wanting him at this time.
  • A day late, but... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Xest ( 935314 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @08:23AM (#44164007)

    This news is a day late. Since this happened Putin told him he can't leak anything else if he wants to stay in Russia so he's withdrawn his request to Russia.

    As for the US breaching article 14 I don't think it matters anymore, they've long thrown articles 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 and 12 out the window in the last decade and no one did anything so of course they'll try and get away with violating the rest despite being a signatory to the UDHR.

    But in this case they're also now violating article 13, which states that:

    "Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.

    Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country."

    Revoking Snowden's passport also violates this from what I can see as by removing his passport they're removing his right to travel and hence to leave Russia.

    Or in other words the US has pretty much now completely thrown the de-facto document on basic levels of standards of human rights entirely out the window.

    As each year goes on they're breaching a new article, when they do that how can they realistically preach to any other nation on human rights? How can they pretend to have the moral high ground next time a blind Chinese human rights activist turns up at their embassy and they claim they should be allowed to let him go to the US against China's will?

  • by ark1 ( 873448 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @08:31AM (#44164073)

    Revoking Snowden's passport also violates this from what I can see as by removing his passport they're removing his right to travel and hence to leave Russia.

    Or in other words the US has pretty much now completely thrown the de-facto document on basic levels of standards of human rights entirely out the window.

    Owning a passport/travelling between countries is a privilege not a right. When someone is suspected of a crime and there is a good chance this person may seek to leave the country to evade prosecution, the passport will be revoked. Snowden is not a special snowflake to warrant a different treatment.

  • by Taco Cowboy ( 5327 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @08:37AM (#44164119) Journal

    http://wikileaks.org/Statement-from-Edward-Snowden-in.html?snow [wikileaks.org]

    Monday July 1, 21:40 UTC
    One week ago I left Hong Kong after it became clear that my freedom and safety were under threat for revealing the truth. My continued liberty has been owed to the efforts of friends new and old, family, and others who I have never met and probably never will. I trusted them with my life and they returned that trust with a faith in me for which I will always be thankful.

    On Thursday, President Obama declared before the world that he would not permit any diplomatic "wheeling and dealing" over my case. Yet now it is being reported that after promising not to do so, the President ordered his Vice President to pressure the leaders of nations from which I have requested protection to deny my asylum petitions.

    This kind of deception from a world leader is not justice, and neither is the extralegal penalty of exile. These are the old, bad tools of political aggression. Their purpose is to frighten, not me, but those who would come after me.

    For decades the United States of America has been one of the strongest defenders of the human right to seek asylum. Sadly, this right, laid out and voted for by the U.S. in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is now being rejected by the current government of my country. The Obama administration has now adopted the strategy of using citizenship as a weapon. Although I am convicted of nothing, it has unilaterally revoked my passport, leaving me a stateless person. Without any judicial order, the administration now seeks to stop me exercising a basic right. A right that belongs to everybody. The right to seek asylum.

    In the end the Obama administration is not afraid of whistleblowers like me, Bradley Manning or Thomas Drake. We are stateless, imprisoned, or powerless. No, the Obama administration is afraid of you. It is afraid of an informed, angry public demanding the constitutional government it was promised Ã" and it should be.

    I am unbowed in my convictions and impressed at the efforts taken by so many.

    Edward Joseph Snowden Monday 1st July 2013

  • by Taco Cowboy ( 5327 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @08:38AM (#44164133) Journal

    Snowden has retracted his asylum application to Russia, on the ground that he does not want to jeopardize the state-to-state relationship between Russia and the USA

  • by Pecisk ( 688001 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @08:58AM (#44164295)

    Problem is he isn't whistle blower, but leaker, t.i. I'm yet to see anything to have "criminal charges" resonate outside of casual leftist forum message in web. He copied bunch of documents, most of them honeypot level. So what? It renewed discussion of NSA and laws it operates with, fine, it would be nice to have productive outcome from it (from example, having secret courts and legal opinions is just wrong). However, neither majority of electorate has wish to touch this issue, nor their representatives care about it. Even so, Snowden's run and farce with public announcements has destroyed any goodwill he would have from general public when he will hit court room (and he will).

  • by AHuxley ( 892839 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @09:08AM (#44164399) Journal
    Yes Charlie, the image of a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_and_Mitchell_defection [wikipedia.org] (1960 NSA cryptologists)
    or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Spies [wikipedia.org] is been held up by a tame US mainstream media and warmed over rewritten talking points.
    The US telco/ad/VoIP/chat brands and their support for bulk domestic access is now just part of life.
    Snowden joins an impressive list of people:
    http://cryptome.org/2013-info/06/whistleblowing/whistleblowing.htm [cryptome.org]
  • by nickmalthus ( 972450 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @09:12AM (#44164437)
    See you on the 4th AC [restorethefourth.net]
  • by Somebody Is Using My ( 985418 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @09:25AM (#44164593) Homepage

    Don't worry, I nice room at the ADX supermax awaits. The next 50 years of your existence: 23 hours a day locked up, in a poured concrete cell, sleeping on a poured concrete bed, pissing in a poured concrete toilet, with a 4 inch wide window that you can only see the sky out of.
        hope it was worth it..

    If life imprisonment is ultimately Snowden's fate, then it's up to /us/ to make sure his sacrifice is "worth it" by holding the criminals
    that his disclosures forced into the light accountable for their crimes. We need to get the politicians, cops, bureaucrats and any others who supported these blatantly un-Constitutional activities out of their positions of power and replaced by people who actually follow the laws and ideals of this country.

    So, given Snowden is likely to have sacrificed his freedom for us, I too hope it was worth it. We have an opportunity to squish the roaches underfoot before they scuttle out of the light. Let's make the best of it.

  • Yet (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @09:25AM (#44164599)

    "does represent ALL THE AMERICANS"
    Only 60 members of Congress were briefed and only 3000 people knew about the project in Government. It doesn't represent *all* Americans. It's a deception that's falling apart sustained by secrecy.

    Conspiracies take time to unravel.

    Half a million signatures tell me, that half a million people SO FAR have read the Guardian leaks. That's a good start.
    As the court opens the 2011 FISA ruling that this program is illegal, they'll be 5 million more.
    As the extent of the phone surveillance becomes apparent it will be 50 million.
    As the extent of the trawl of public records comes out, that will be 300 million.

  • Re:Norway (Score:4, Informative)

    by 49152 ( 690909 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @09:45AM (#44164843)

    Norway has declined his application on formal grounds:
    http://www.dagbladet.no/2013/07/02/nyheter/politikk/snowden/27999533/ [dagbladet.no] (article in Norwegian language).

    According to Norwegian law you have to actually be on Norwegian territory (an embassy would do) to apply for asylum. Since the application was sent to the embassy in Moscow by fax it was denied.

    I think most of Europe has similar laws and will deny his application for the same reason.

  • by sangreal66 ( 740295 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @09:50AM (#44164889)

    There is nothing extreme about it, it is entirely routine:

    The principal law enforcement reasons for the U.S. State Department to deny
    or revoke a passport are the existence of (1) a valid federal or state felony arrest warrant; or (2) a
    criminal court order, condition of parole or condition of probation that forbids departure from the
    United States (See 22 C.F.R. 51.60-51.62)

    http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/smart/pdfs/passport_fact_sheet.pdf [usdoj.gov]

    This pdf is about sex offenders, but that isn't relevant to the regulations they cite (and I'm just demonstrating that it is standard procedure). 22 C.F.R. 51.62 allows them to revoke a passport if the bearer would not be eligible to get a new passport:

    51.62 Revocation or limitation of passports.

    (a) The Department may revoke or limit a passport when

    (1) The bearer of the passport may be denied a passport under 22 CFR 51.60 or 51.61 ; or 51.28 ; or any other provision contained in this part; or,

    22 C.F.R. 51.60 allows for denying a new passport based on outstanding arrest warrants:

    (b) The Department may refuse to issue a passport in any case in which the Department determines or is informed by competent authority that:

    (1) The applicant is the subject of an outstanding Federal warrant of arrest for a felony, including a warrant issued under the Federal Fugitive Felon Act (18 U.S.C. 1073); or

    Put together, they can and do revoke passports based simply on having an outstanding arrest warrant, without a specific court order

  • by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Tuesday July 02, 2013 @11:22AM (#44166077)

    I used to be stateless (de jure, with a 1954 convention travel document), and you are quite wrong. I had the right to return to Germany and the same right of entry to a country someone else with a valid visum has.

And it should be the law: If you use the word `paradigm' without knowing what the dictionary says it means, you go to jail. No exceptions. -- David Jones

Working...