Edward Snowden spy leaks:

Liam Fox in push for

Guardian newspaper to be
prosecuted
Liam Fox, the former Defence Secretary,
writes to the Director of Public
Prosecutions urging her to set out
whether publication of leaks by Edward
Snowden breached counter-terrorism
laws
By David Barrett and Davidbarrett 09 November 2013 •
9:02pm
Dr Liam Fox has written to the Director of Public Prosecutions urging her to set out
whether the Guardian newspaper breached counter-terrorism laws Credit: Photo: EPA

A senior Conservative politician has intensified pressure

for the Guardian newspaper to be prosecuted over its role
in disclosing secrets about Britain’s spying capabilities.

Dr Liam Fox has written to Alison Saunders, the Director

of Public Prosecutions (DPP), urging her to set out
whether the newspaper breached counter-terrorism laws
by publishing secrets which were stolen by the former US
spy contractor Edward Snowden.

The former defence secretary’s letter asks the DPP how a

prosecution against the Guardian could be “initiated”,
although Dr Fox has not yet indicated whether he would
be prepared to trigger such action himself.

In an article for The Telegraph, Dr Fox says he recognised

surveillance by government agencies was a legitimate
topic for debate.

But he accused The Guardian of collaborating in

“indiscriminate publication” of material which had
damaged national security.

Dr Fox’s intervention comes after the nation’s three

leading spy chiefs last week told Parliament that
terrorists around the world have already been
monitored discussing how to evade surveillance by
implementing knowledge gleaned from Mr Snowden’s
leaks.

Sir John Sawers, the Chief of the Secret Intelligence

Service, MI6, who is also known by the code-name “C”,
said: “Al-Qaeda is lapping it up.”

Dr Fox writes: “No-one has a right to compromise the

safety of the people of our country.”

He accuses The Guardian’s editor Alan Rusbridger of

“exhibit[ing] no sense of understanding, never mind
remorse, about what damage might have been done to
the safety of individuals or the country”.

Dr Fox says he is particularly concerned by Mr

Rusbridger’s admission that The Guardian had sent
copies of the Snowden material abroad.

“To ... actually divulge the details of named individual

agents to overseas sources is likely to constitute a crime.
This is why I have written to the Director of Public
Prosecutions on the issue,” he says.

Scotland Yard launched a criminal inquiry in the summer

after David Miranda, the partner of a Guardian journalist,
was found to be couriering 58,000 highly classified
electronic documents through Heathrow airport. His flight
had been paid for by The Guardian.

However, it is not known whether the investigation is

examining the newspaper’s involvement in the affair.

Disclosures by The Guardian, and other titles overseas,

have exposed the surveillance and decryption abilities of
British and US spy agencies, which Sir John and other
Whitehall officials say has put “lives at risk”.

Mr Snowden, a former contractor for the US National

Security Agency, has been granted temporary asylum by
Russia.

Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, has rejected US

pleas to send Mr Snowden home to face charges
including espionage.
The possibility that hostile governments have been able to
view the unredacted contents of Mr Snowden’s stolen
files is known to have caused enormous concern to MI5
and MI6.

It remains unknown whether the raw material contains the

names of British agents or other information which could
allow hostile states to identify them.

Last week MPs Julian Smith and Stephen Phillips QC

asked The Guardian to say in “clear and unambiguous
terms” whether anyone at The Guardian had allowed the
stolen files to be accessed by anyone overseas.

It was confirmed on Friday that Mr Rusbridger will be

questioned by the Commons’ all-party Home Affairs
Select Committee next month about his newspaper’s role
in the affair.
In his letter to the DPP, Dr Fox says: “In recent days there
have been further accusations that The Guardian passed
the names of GCHQ agents to foreign journalists and
bloggers.

“Would such activities, if true, constitute an offence under

the Terrorism Act 2000 or other related legislation,
particularly the passing of details of identified security
personnel?”

He adds: “Under what conditions and by what procedures

would a decision be taken to prosecute any individuals
responsible for such activities and how would such a
process be initiated?”

Last month Lord Carlile of Berriew QC, the former

terrorism watchdog, said The Guardian's publication of
stories based on Mr Snowden’s material was a
“criminal act” and it was wrong to paint the newspaper’s
journalists as “virtuous whistleblowers”.