(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
There was a rush of anticipation among Edward Snowden's supporters and a laugh of indignation among his political opponents when the announcer was awarded the Norwegian PEN's large Freedom of Expression Award for 2016, the Ossietzky Prize. The divisive reaction became all the more evident when the award winner was also invited to Oslo to personally receive the prize and tribute in the University Hall. Was he a hero, an announcer, or a countryman?
And it was optimistically asked – will the government here at home and in the United States use the chance to curb the criticism of sinners against international illegal surveillance by letting him come? Were they willing to give him free rent and interpret an extradition agreement in his favor? Or would they mobilize all their resistance – legally and politically – to prevent him from crossing the Norwegian border? Few were surprised when this hopeful optimism was met with drumsticks of discreet legal opposition. And of official silence – both at home and abroad.
Why the price? Edward Snowden's revelations of an international as well as national surveillance community ruled by Washington are the most important settlement of covert and illegal power politics that has occurred in the Western world in recent times. The consequences are different, but the level is as complex as the Panama Papers' unmasking of worldwide financial fraud.
What stands out about Snowden's actions is his understanding of the seriousness, the loneliness of the role of the notifier, and yet his unwavering willingness to act according to his conscience. Snowden understands his contemporary. Support for his behavior is in wide circles as a barometer of our time. Polarizations in our time against individualism and selfishness, yes, material sidings, often called body and greed, have consequences. The popular opinion is deeply connected to his courage and disinterestedness. The hatred of corruption and abuse of power is intense. The language of power is frightening, and the prospect of 30 years in prison for a whistleblower is unheard of.
For the Norwegian PEN, it is important to contribute with a sharp voice that supports the open, credible democratic voice, and gives the speaker's freedom of expression. And protection against abuse. But the award ceremony wants something more. It can contribute something more because it can be made spectacular. It can focus on the hidden pages of the surveillance. Today, its scope and purpose are obscured by its electronic immense potential for underground mole work. Snowden's uncovering of the massive global surveillance is thought provoking and daunting. It threatens the private space and the integrity of all individuals in the small and the big. Yes, in any democratic country, uncertain surveillance can turn into abuse. Its framework and purpose must be discussed in public fora such as the UN, first and foremost. The international community should come to an understanding of what is beneficial and what is a violation of human rights and basic individual values.
The purpose of the award is thus to protect the rights of the notifier, as well as create a debate about the monitoring's international law and national framework. But it will also pay homage to Snowden's personal courage, integrity and insight into the decay of the guarantees that will secure the legal security of individuals, yes – democracy itself.
Snowden – Ossietzky of our time. We can draw a few lines from Carl von Ossietzky's Nobel Prize to Edward Snowden's Ossietzky Prize. Both were alerters, and both risked their personal safety, life and health when they revealed the conditions the authorities would keep secret. Despite Ossietzky's reliance on open sources, increased awareness of the German armament in the interwar period was something that Nazi Germany could not tolerate.
The language of power is frightening, and the prospect of 30 years in prison for an alert is unheard.
Ossietzky did not participate in any handover 80 years ago, in 1936 (for the year 1935). He was never allowed to come to Norway, and he died in prison in 1938. But the Nobel ceremony in Oslo went its way. With empty chairs – not just to mark Ossietzky's absence, but also because King Haakon and leading newspapers and central politicians amazingly marked their distance from the award by not leaving the ceremony. The King's absence – for the first and only time in the history of the Peace Prize! It is an extremely embarrassing chapter in the history of the Nobel Prize and the modern kingdom.
It is known that Edward Snowden uncovered illegitimate and extensive state and global surveillance and espionage, both against individual countries, heads of state and private individuals. The disclosure of the NSA's monitoring of millions of phone calls resulted in a U.S. court of appeals last year finding the surveillance illegal because it was not approved by Congress.
It was thus a state enterprise that the US legal system judged illegal. For Snowden and many with him, the interventions appear to be a serious violation of the US Constitution. The use of World War I legislation, The Espionage Act of 1917, has so far given him no protection and understanding from the US government – in the rule of law in the United States. He risks life imprisonment under inhumane conditions.
Why to Norway? What are the Norwegian authorities worried about when Snowden is invited to Norway? Probably many more will worry, not least the United States and the cooperating countries of supervisors, the so-called nine eyes. But human rights organizations around the world have supported Snowden's notifications of illegal surveillance.
In a non-binding resolution, the European Parliament in 2015 reaffirmed Snowden's status as a human rights advocate and defender. Member States were encouraged to grant him asylum.
The formal thresholds are that Snowden is deprived of his US passport, his legal status, extradition law and agreement and what else the legal expertise of governments can mobilize from formal and political barriers. This is surely the lawless little man in legal and political struggle against state power!
Courage for debate. In particular, one aspect of the Snowden case is of concern, namely the absence of political debate – both about the lack of surveillance and about Norway's sovereignty. Why and what does official Norway stop from speaking? We know that politicians in the Storting support Snowden, perhaps even a majority when it comes to the deeper recognition of the truth.
The real fear is power-driven. We know that it will take a lot before the Norwegian authorities dare to challenge the great power of the United States. Of course, such caution and self-censorship is important to challenge. Any lack of political debate, no matter how problematic or "dangerous" the theme, is a sign of the beginning of weathering of democracy, and of the Americans, probably a consequence of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
It requires the integrity and courage of Norwegian politicians to debate and take a stand. The unison silence is simply self-censorship. In good spirits, Norwegian media have been supportive of the award. Both the country's press organizations and the Norwegian PEN act as a party to help the state win awards for the country – as a symbolic act in support of our individual freedom and the country's independence.
Norwegian politicians should follow up. It should be taken for Edward Snowden, the greatest and most important of our times, to come to Oslo and receive a prize – a freedom of speech award from a sovereign and responsible country like Norway, to show that human rights can be promoted over power politics. It will make us all great to show respect for the little man's struggle for his rights.
Nygaard is chairman of the board of Norwegian PEN.
