Snowden, Assange and the team at
Wikileaks has done a huge service to humanity, so any excuses for not
inviting them seem lame, Jane Duncan from Rhodes University of South
Africa told RT.
A massive internet forum on issues of privacy and surveillance
took place in Stockholm on May 26. However, all the leading
whistleblowers, including Edward Snowden and Glen Greenwald were
blacklisted from taking part, and even Wikileaks representatives
were banned. The move has caused a storm on Twitter, which has
been rife with sarcasm and anger towards the conference
organizers.
Download video
(27.95 MB)
RT: The organizers gave some answers as to why these people were not invited. Do you think gender balance is a reasonable excuse?
Jane Duncan: They did not only use the excuse of gender balance but also the need for geographic representation as well. Personally I find these excuses to be extremely weak. In fact, I would say that they were an insult to our intelligence. There were over 450 participants from around the world and I do not think that the addition of 2-3 more white males would have made any difference whatsoever.
RT: The organizers gave some answers as to why these people were not invited. Do you think gender balance is a reasonable excuse?
Jane Duncan: They did not only use the excuse of gender balance but also the need for geographic representation as well. Personally I find these excuses to be extremely weak. In fact, I would say that they were an insult to our intelligence. There were over 450 participants from around the world and I do not think that the addition of 2-3 more white males would have made any difference whatsoever.
RT: What is the actual reason behind the
ban, do you think?
JD: It troubled all of us in the conference. In
fact, a lot of us coming from the global South were concerned
that we were actually being used in order to legitimize what is a
completely unacceptable decision. I suspect that the reason why
this decision was taken was because the Swedish government did
not want to embarrass the US government in this particular
conference, and as we know there has been information that has
come out of Snowden’s revelations which has linked GCHQ, the NSA
and Swedish intelligence in collaborations. I suspect that it may
have been an attempt to try and prevent a full airing of those
particular issues. Obviously Edward Snowden and Greenwald, the
people who were instrumental in exposing these particular
collaborations, would have been best placed to speak about these
issues.
RT: What was the point of the conference and
did it achieve anything?
JD: I have to say that I was really proud of
many of the people who were especially civil society
representatives. There was a very hot session towards the end
where the Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt participated, and
there was a US government representative as well. I must say that
both of them were given hell, they were not let off the hook and
I think that especially US civil society really took the US
government representative to task. So I think to that extent, it
has been communicated to both Swedish and US governments that the
decision that was taken not to invite the key protagonists in
what is really the biggest story around communications
surveillance in the past year was not acceptable. I think that
message has been communicated loud and clear. And to that extent
it was a very useful conference.
RT: Are we seeing a new wave of pressure on
whistleblowers across the world?
JD: Yes, most certainly. I think whistleblowers
around the world are under attack. I must also say that Edward
Snowden, Julian Assange and the team at Wikileaks have done a
huge service to humanity. Even my own country, South Africa, has
felt the ripples of the information that has come out of the
particular leaks, because Wikileaks released information that was
showing that South Africa was manufacturing mass surveillance
technology that has since been found in the listening rooms of
Libya and Egypt. And this is the legacy that I think these
extremely courageous whistleblowers have left behind. It must
have been tremendously difficult for them to make the decisions
that they did, to put themselves on the line in the way that they
did. At least they still have their lives in spite of the fact
that to an extent their lives have been ruined by these
particular decisions. In a country like South Africa for
instance, whistleblowers have been assassinated for speaking out
about issues of corruption and government mismanagement. All of
this goes to show that we have a crisis around the protection of
whistleblowers around the world, and particularly those
whistleblowers who are located deep in the belly of the beast of
the emerging surveillance state, and its these people who need
the greatest protection at a time when the protection is clearly
so incredibly weak. Let’s hope that other whistleblowers will not
be discouraged by what has happened to Snowden and Assange and
others, and will step forward and will expose government excesses
in other intelligence agencies around the world because we will
certainly need that.