Leaked Documents Show German Intelligence Agency Spent Years Spying On Foreign And Domestic Journalists
from the no-oversight,-no-self-control dept
The tools are there to be abused. Anyone who doubts this aspect of intrusive surveillance programs is either a supporter or a beneficiary. Oversight might be in place and various checks and balances instituted, but the scope and breadth of these programs ensures -- at minimum -- collection of communications and data government surveillance agencies have no business looking at.
If someone's given a tool that allows them to snoop on almost anyone with impunity, it will eventually be abused. Case in point: everywhere and everything related to state-sponsored surveillance.
Spiegel, which has published several surveillance agency leaks (from Snowden and others), has obtained some more documents. The documents haven't been published, but the contents indicate that -- from 1999 on -- Germany's foreign intelligence agency (BND) has used its powers to snoop on journalists and their sources.
According to documents seen by SPIEGEL, the BND conducted surveillance on at least 50 [...] telephone numbers, fax numbers and email addresses belonging to journalists or newsrooms around the world in the years following 1999.
Included among them were more than a dozen connections belonging to the BBC, often to the offices of the international World Service. The documents indicate that the German intelligence agency didn't just tap into the phones of BBC correspondents in Afghanistan, but also targeted telephone and fax numbers at BBC headquarters in London.
A phone number belonging to the New York Times in Afghanistan was also on the BND list, as were several mobile and satellite numbers belonging to the news agency Reuters in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Nigeria.
The extent of the surveillance isn't detailed in the article. The writer refers to phones being "tapped" but also states the journalists' numbers were used as "selectors," which possibly means this was limited to data collection, rather than communications.
Not that it possibly being "just metadata" makes it any less of a violation. German law supposedly shelters journalists from domestic surveillance with protections roughly comparable to attorney-client privilege. But the reality of the situation proves the country's laws are only as strong as those enforcing them. Watching the watchers is something no country seems to do well, and Germany is no exception.
This wouldn't be the only time Germany's BND has targeted journalists. It may be the earliest (leaked) record of such behavior, but Spiegel has covered previous leaks in which journalists' emails were intercepted and other journalists were caught in the crossfire of BND's surveillance of allies' government agencies.
This news comes just as a three-year investigation into BND's tactics and surveillance programs wraps up. Not that anything will come of this investigation. During the investigation's running time, leaks continued to highlight inappropriate surveillance, even as Germany's legislators set about codifying BND's previously-illegal snooping. As long as surveillance powers continue to expand and agencies are given a free pass for previous bad behavior, citizens' rights will continue to be violated.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: bnd, germany, journalism, surveillance
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
huh?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
domestic?
While the actions of the BND might be despicable and morally wrong on many levels, they did not actually spy on any domestic journalists (in this case, aparently they did in another in 2006).
The linked article does not mention the BND directly targeting any german journalists (for the 2006 case they claim they were targetting the party the journalist was communicating with).
The Spiegel article also quotes the head of the german chapter of Reporters without Borders, arguing that the protection against spying should apply to journalist worldwide. Making it pretty clear that the spying was legal this time, but still morally wrong.
So horrible, awful and wrong? Yes!
Domestic? No. (this time)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spying...
There are multiple reasons for spying, and ALL of them a benefit to the country. It is expected, and getting into trouble over it is minimal. The only danger is against the agent who needs to be good enough to not get caught, or they might be killed or punished in other ways.
We all know everyone is trying to infiltrate, learn, and influence other nations as much as they can afford to do so.
But the message is clear, spy! spy! spy! but try to avoid being caught.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Spying...
Mass surveillance of citizens would be questionable in a legitimate, representative democracy run by the best and brightest.
In this world, it is unsustainable and offensive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who's next? Quakers?
I'm not exactly shocked by this. Spying on people who openly organize or report seems to be the main purpose of government surveillance, "terrorism!" justifications notwithstanding.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Who's next? Quakers?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All this surveillance can't end well
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just another beauty.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
On pig fellatio, and other things
I always thought that the BBC was more impartial than that. Blair's foolhardy invasion of Iraq brought much scorn and derision from the BBC. They tore his "dodgy dossier" and the "45 minutes from doom" to pieces. Without mercy. And Blair was supposed to be a media guru. Cameron didn't fare much better. Although they were a bit late, they did actually cover the pig fellatio saga. The jury's out on May.
I'm quite glad the BBC is still going strong, and still largely independent, if only to keep Murdoch frothing with impotent rage...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]