The Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel memo on interrogation of enemy combatants that was declassified this week “exemplifies the political abuse of classification authority,” Secrecy News suggested yesterday.
J. William Leonard, the nation’s top classification oversight official from 2002-2007, concurred.
“The disappointment I feel with respect to the abuse of the classification system in this instance is profound,” said Mr. Leonard, who recently retired as director of the Information Security Oversight Office, which reports to the President on classification and declassification policy.
“The document in question (pdf) is purely a legal analysis,” he said, and it contains “nothing which would justify classification.”
Beyond that crucial fact, the binding technical requirements of classification were ignored.
Thus, he explained: There were no portion markings, identifying which paragraphs were classified at what level. The original classifier was not identified on the cover page by name or position. The duration of classification was not given. A concise basis for classification was not specified. Yet all of these are explicitly required by the President’s executive order on classification.
“It is not even apparent that [John] Yoo [who authored the memo] had original classification authority,” Mr. Leonard said.
“All too often, government officials simply assert classification. To enjoy the legal safeguards of the classification system, you need to do more than that. Those basic, elemental steps were not followed in this instance.”
“Also, for the Department of Defense to declassify a Department of Justice document,” as in this case, “is highly irregular,” Mr. Leonard said.
(The DoD declassifier mistakenly cited “Executive Order 1958” on the cover page of the declassified memorandum. The correct citation is “Executive Order 12958, as amended.”)
Violations of classification policy pale in comparison to the policy deviations authorized by the Justice Department memo, which was ultimately rescinded. Nevertheless, such classification violations are significant because they enabled the Administration to pursue its interrogation policies without independent scrutiny or accountability.
“To learn that such a document is classified has the same effect for me as waking up one morning and learning that after all these years there is a ‘secret’ Article IV to the Constitution that the American people did not even know about,” said Mr. Leonard.
“There is no information contained in this document which gives an advantage to the enemy,” he said. “The only possible rationale for making it secret was to keep it from the American people.”
To empower new voices to start their career in nuclear weapons studies, the Federation of American Scientists launched the New Voices on Nuclear Weapons Fellowship. Here’s what our inaugural cohort accomplished.
Common frameworks for evaluating proposals leave this utility function implicit, often evaluating aspects of risk, uncertainty, and potential value independently and qualitatively.
The FAS Nuclear Notebook is one of the most widely sourced reference materials worldwide for reliable information about the status of nuclear weapons and has been published in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists since 1987. The Nuclear Notebook is researched and written by the staff of the Federation of American Scientists’ Nuclear Information Project: Director Hans […]
According to the National Center for Education Statistics’ August 2023 pulse panel, 60% of public schools were utilizing a “community school” or “wraparound services model” at the start of this school year—up from 45% last year.