An Official Secrets Act (OSA) is legislation that provides for the protection of state secrets and official information, mainly related to national security. OSAs are currently in-force in Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Myanmar, Malaysia, Singapore and the United Kingdom, and have previously existed in Canada and New Zealand, There were earlier English and British precedents, long before the acts enumerated here. As early as the 16th Century, following Francis Drake's circumnavigation, Queen Elizabeth I declared that all written accounts of Drake's voyages were to become the 'Queen's secrets of the Realm'. In addition, Drake and the other participants of his voyages were sworn to their secrecy on the pain of death; the Queen intended to keep Drake's activities away from the eyes of rival Spain.
Introduction
Official Secrets Act
Official Secrets Act | Introduction
Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Myanmar, Malaysia, Singapore and the United Kingdom etc Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Myanmar, Malaysia, Singapore and the United Kingdom, and have previously existed in Canada and New Zealand Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Myanmar, Malaysia, Singapore and the United Kingdom, and have previously existed in Canada and New Zealand. Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Myanmar,etc.
who headed up the manhattan project in britain
user
James Chadwick
assistant
who is he?
user
He was a British physicist.
assistant
what was he known for?
user
His discovery of the neutron.
assistant
can you describe this thing he discovered?
user
It is a subatomic particle, symbol or which has a neutral (not positive or negative) charge and a mass slightly greater than that of a proton.
assistant
why was the above project started?
user
It helped initiate the effort to build the first atomic bombs in the United States during World War II, and helped carry it through to completion in August 1945 by supplying crucial expertise.
assistant
any other scientist were involved in it?
user
Sir Geoffrey Taylor, James Tuck, Niels Bohr, Peierls, Frisch, and Klaus Fuchs
assistant
what field did the last scientist study?
user
Mathematics and physics
assistant
why was he sent to prison?
user
He was convicted on 1 March 1950 of four counts of breaking the Official Secrets Act by "communicating information to a potential enemy.
assistant
what was the sentence announced by the court?
user
14 years imprisonment
assistant
can you explain the act that he broke?
user
It is legislation that provides for the protection of state secrets and official information, mainly related to national security.
assistant
which countries follow it?
user
The Act applies in the United Kingdom, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands, and in overseas crown territories and colonies. It also applies to British subjects anywhere else in the world. The Act was repealed for the Republic of Ireland by section 3 of the Official Secrets Act 1963.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Introduction
The phrase "official secrets act" may also be used to refer to statutes of a similar nature in other countries. Canada's "Official Secrets Act" was replaced in 2001 by similar legislation titled the "Security of Information Act" (which was created in the wake of September 11th 2001 to replace the vaguely worded Official Secrets Act). The United States does not have a broad-reaching Official Secrets Act, although the Espionage Act of 1917 has similar components. Much of the Espionage Act remains in force, although some has been struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional because of the First Amendment (See "United States v.
Official Secrets Act | Official Secrets Acts in other countries
MI5/MI6).
Official Secrets Act | United Kingdom
The Progressive", "Brandenburg v. Ohio", "New York Times Co. v. United States"). , enacted in 1951, makes dissemination of secret information involving cryptography, espionage, and surveillance illegal for all people, and is thus an "official secrets act" limited to those subjects. In the Republic of Ireland the Official Secrets Act, 1963 repealed previous British legislation of 1911 and 1920. The Official Secrets Act, as amended, applies to all civil servants and potentially anyone within the state. A suit may only be instigated at the approval of the Attorney General of Ireland, additionally proceedings may occur in camera but the verdict and any sentence must occur in public.
Official Secrets Act | Official Secrets Acts in other countries
The Official Secrets Act 1951 (long title: "An Act to make better provision in respect of official secrets") was a statute of the New Zealand Parliament. It was based on the UK Official Secrets Act 1911, and provided for criminal penalties for espionage and unauthorised releases of government information. The only prosecution under the espionage provisions of the Act was that of Bill Sutch, who was unsuccessfully prosecuted in 1974-5 following a series of clandestine meetings with KGB agent Dimitri Rasgovorov, an official of the Soviet Union's embassy in Wellington. At the trial the Security Intelligence Service was unable to provide details of what information had supposedly been passed, and Sutch was subsequently acquitted by the jury.
Official Secrets Act 1951 | Introduction
An Official Secrets Act (OSA) is legislation that provides for the protection of state secrets and official information, mainly related to national security. OSAs are currently in-force in Hong Kong, India, Ireland, Myanmar, Malaysia, Singapore and the United Kingdom, and have previously existed in Canada and New Zealand, There were earlier English and British precedents, long before the acts enumerated here. As early as the 16th Century, following Francis Drake's circumnavigation, Queen Elizabeth I declared that all written accounts of Drake's voyages were to become the 'Queen's secrets of the Realm'. In addition, Drake and the other participants of his voyages were sworn to their secrecy on the pain of death; the Queen intended to keep Drake's activities away from the eyes of rival Spain.
Official Secrets Act | Introduction
Section 6 creates an offence of making a "damaging disclosure" which "relates to security or intelligence, defence or international relations" where that information was provided in confidence "by or on behalf of the United Kingdom to another State or to an international organisation" where that person obtained it without that State or organization's authorization, and where no other offence under the earlier sections of this Act applies. Lawful authority and prior authorized disclosure are defences against this offence.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 6 - Information entrusted in confidence to other States or to international organisations
The Official Secrets Act 1911 (1 & 2 Geo 5 c 28) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It replaces the Official Secrets Act 1889. The Act was introduced in response to public alarm at reports of wide-scale espionage, some of them fomented by popular novels and plays that dramatized the threat, supposedly from Germany, at a time of a rapid naval expansion. Its provisions were extensive, with heavy penalties for any reporting or sketching of military, naval or air defence installations, or the harbouring of people suspected of gathering such intelligence. It has been amended several times; most importantly the "catch-all" provisions contained in section 2 of the Act were repealed and replaced by the Official Secrets Act 1989.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Introduction
Section 3(1)(a) creates an offence of disclosing information, documents or other articles relating to international relations. This includes confidential information, documents or other article from a State other than the United Kingdom or an international organisation. This section applies only to crown servants and government contractors.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 3 - International relations
The Official Secrets Act 1989 (c. 6) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that repeals and replaces section 2 of the Official Secrets Act 1911, thereby removing the public interest defence created by that section. Lord Bingham said that the white paper "Reform of Section 2 of the Official Secrets Act 1911" (Cm. 408) (June 1988) was the immediate precursor of this Act and that its recommendations bear directly on the interpretation of this Act.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Introduction
The Act was repealed in 1983 by the Official Information Act 1982.
Official Secrets Act 1951 | Introduction
The Official Secrets Act 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 52) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It created offences of disclosure of information (section 1) and breach of official trust (section 2). It was replaced in the UK by the Official Secrets Act 1911. The Official Secrets Bill began its parliamentary procedures on 10 May 1888, achieving its royal assent on 26 August 1889. It was initiated by Lord George Hamilton PC First Lord of the Admiralty and Edward Stanhope (PC) Secretary of State for War. The bill was enacted by the Attorney General; Richard Webster to give increased powers against offences of disclosing confidential matters by officials, and to prevent the disclosure of such documents and information by spies, and/or to prevent breaches of official trust, in order to punish such offences of obtaining information and communicating it, against the interests of the British state.
Official Secrets Act 1889 | Introduction
The Official Secrets Act 1939 (2 & 3 Geo. 6 c. 121) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It substitutes a new section 6 into the Official Secrets Act 1920, which limits the scope of that offence to offences under section 1 of the Official Secrets Act 1911 (it had formerly applied to all offences under the Official Secrets Act 1911 and to all offences under that Act). It was enacted in reaction to the "Sandys affair" in 1938, when Duncan Sandys MP was threatened with prosecution under section 6 in an attempt to get him to disclose who had given him information about the inadequate state of the air defences around London.
Official Secrets Act 1939 | Introduction
The act, with its extremely wide-ranging powers, replaced the earlier Official Secrets Act 1889 that had provided criminal sanctions only for breaches which could be shown to be contrary to the public interest. Section 1 of the act contained tough provisions against espionage, which were extended by a 1962 Law Lords ruling to cover other activities such as sabotage and physical interference. Section 2 dealt with unauthorised disclosure of information held by servants of the State, making it a criminal offence to disclose "any" official information without lawful authority. It was only after nearly 80 years that the Official Secrets Act 1989 replaced this provision in the 1911 Act.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Background
Section 16(1) authorises the citation of this Act by a short title. Section 16(2) authorises the citation of this Act and the Official Secrets Acts 1911 to 1939 by a collective title. Section 16(5) provides that the repeals of parts of the Official Secrets Act 1911 and the Official Secrets Act 1920 in Schedule 2 do not extend to any of the territories mentioned in section 15(3), subject to any Order made under section 15(3). The said territories mentioned in section 15(3) are the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man and all colonies. Such an Order was made in relation to Hong Kong (see above).
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 16 - Citation, commencement, amendments, repeals and revocation
The act defines an "official secret" as: The Schedule to the Act covers "Cabinet documents, records of decisions and deliberations including those of Cabinet committees", as well as similar documents for state executive councils. It also includes "documents concerning national security, defence and international relations".
Official Secrets Act 1972 | Provisions
Invasion fiction also became extremely popular, with novels such as Erskine Childers' 1903 "The Riddle of the Sands", Le Queux's "The Invasion of 1910" serialised by the Daily Mail in 1906, and Saki's "When William Came" of 1913. The 1911 Agadir Crisis, in which the UK threatened war with Germany, was the final trigger for the government. In an atmosphere of widespread hysteria, it introduced the act in the House of Lords on 25 July 1911. The act was then rushed through Parliament, with little debate or opposition, passing through all of its stages in a single day, 18 August 1911, and receiving the Royal assent four days later on 22 August.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Background
In early 2003, GCHQ analyst Katharine Gun obtains a memo detailing a joint United States and British operation to spy on diplomats from several non–permanent United Nations Security Council member states Cameroon, Chile, Bulgaria and Guinea in order to "dig dirt" on them and influence the Security Council into passing a resolution supporting an invasion of Iraq. Angered that the United Kingdom is being led into a war on false pretenses, Katharine leaks the memo to a friend involved in the anti-war movement, who passes it to anti-war activist Yvonne Ridley, who in turn passes it to "The Observer" journalist Martin Bright.
Official Secrets (film) | Plot summary
The Official Secrets Act 1923 is India's anti-espionage act held over from the British colonial period. It states clearly that actions which involve helping an enemy state against India are strongly condemned. It also states that one cannot approach, inspect, or even pass over a prohibited government site or area like an electrical substation. According to this Act, helping the enemy state can be in the form of communicating a sketch, plan, model of an official secret, or of official codes or passwords, to the enemy.
Official Secrets Act (India) | Introduction
This section provides: "The principal Act" This means the Official Secrets Act 1911. (see section 1)
Official Secrets Act 1920 | Section 7 – Attempts, incitements, &c
The Official Secrets Act 1920 (10 & 11 Geo 5 c 75) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom.
Official Secrets Act 1920 | Introduction
Section 1(1) creates an offence of disclosing information, documents or other articles relating to security or intelligence. It can be committed by any person who is or has been a member of the security and intelligence services, or who is or has been a person notified that he is subject to the provisions of section 1(1). Cases under this section:
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 1 - Security and intelligence
This section defines the words and expressions "disclose", "disclosure", "international organisation", "prescribed" and "State" for the purposes of the Act.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 13 - Other interpretation provisions
This section now provides: The words in square brackets were substituted for the words "wilfully refuses" by section 10 of, and the First Schedule to, the Official Secrets Act 1920. The words at the end of this subsection were repealed by section 11(2) of, and the first paragraph of the Second Schedule to, the Official Secrets Act 1920. They are replaced by section 8(1) of that Act.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Section 7 - Penalty for harbouring spies
There are several Acts of the United Kingdom Parliament for the protection of official information, mainly related to national security. The latest revision is the Official Secrets Act 1989 (1989 chapter 6), which removed the "public interest defence" by repealing section 2 of the Official Secrets Act 1911. In 2004, a memo containing details of a possible US bombing of broadcaster Al Jazeera was leaked to the press. Attorney General Peter Goldsmith has warned newspapers that they could be prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act if they publish the contents of the memo, saying "You are reminded that to publish the contents of a document which is known to have been unlawfully disclosed by a crown servant is in itself a breach of section 5 of the Official Secrets Act 1989".
Censorship in the United Kingdom | National security
The Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) annual report for 2005–2006 on UK intelligence services states:
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Proposed revisions
This section creates a rule of evidence in prosecutions under section 1 of the 1911 Act. Section 2(1) provides: See R v Kent [1941] 1 KB 454, 28 Cr App R 23, 57 TLR 307, CCA
Official Secrets Act 1920 | Section 2 – Communications with foreign agents to be evidence of commission of certain offences
This section relates to further disclosure of information, documents or other articles protected from disclosure by the preceding sections of the Act. It allows, for example, the prosecution of newspapers or journalists who publish secret information leaked to them by a crown servant in contravention of section 3. This section applies to everyone.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 5 - Information resulting from unauthorised disclosures or entrusted in confidence
The Official Secrets Act 1972 (, abbreviated OSA), is a statute in Malaysia prohibiting the dissemination of information classified as an official secret. The legislation is based on the Official Secrets Act of the United Kingdom. After criticism of the act for lacking clarity, it was amended in 1986.
Official Secrets Act 1972 | Introduction
This was in reaction to a Chinese buildup and a decreased American influence in the region. In the same month, the Diet passed the Abe cabinet's State Secrecy Law, which took effect in December 2014. The law expanded the scope for the government to designate what information constitutes a state secret and increased penalties for bureaucrats and journalists who leak such information to up to 10 years in prison and a 10 million yen fine. The passage of the law proved controversial, with thousands protesting the bill in Tokyo and the cabinet's approval rating falling below 50 percent for the first time in some polls.
Shinzo Abe | Defense and security policy
In addition to the Official Secrets Acts, the Naval Discipline Act 1957 made it an offence to spy on-board Royal Navy ships or overseas bases. It was punishable by life imprisonment. This was a capital offence until 1981. 22 prosecutions occurred under the Official Secrets Act in Canada, over half of which were in relation to the Gouzenko Affair. In 1989, Stephen Joseph Ratkai was charged and convicted under the Act, of espionage in relation to the SOSUS network site at Naval Station Argentia in Newfoundland.
Official Secrets Act | Other legislation
Section 15(1)(a) provides that any act done by a British citizens or Crown servant, which would be an offence under any provision of the Act other than sections 8(1) or 8(4) or 8(5) if done by him in the United Kingdom, is an offence under that provision. This is intended to cover espionage (where someone travels to a foreign country and discloses secret information to a foreign power) and cases where someone travels to a foreign country and discloses secret information, perhaps to a newspaper. Section 15(1)(b) provides that any act done by any person in any of the Channel Islands, or in the Isle of Man, or in any colony, which would be an offence under any provision of the Act other than sections 8(1) or 8(4) or 8(5) if done by him in the United Kingdom, is an offence under that provision.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 15 - Acts done abroad and extent
In 2012 constitutional law expert Pierre de Vos stated that the act is outdated, referring to the Official Secrets Act of 1956 repealed in 1982, and contravenes the country's post-apartheid constitution. In February 2013 Deputy Minister of Public Works Jeremy Cronin publicly criticised the act, saying "This Parliament does need to look at this anachronistic and problematic piece of legislation, it may well be unconstitutional."
National Key Points Act, 1980 | Legislative review
On 13 January 2004, the government withdrew its case against him to prevent having two of its ministries having to give contradictory opinions. Gilani was released the same month.
Official Secrets Act (India) | Iftikhar Gilani case
Sections 1(1) and (2) provide: "Misdemeanour" See the Criminal Law Act 1967, the Criminal Law Act (Northern Ireland) 1967 and section 8(2) of this Act.
Official Secrets Act 1920 | Section 1 – Unauthorised use of uniforms; falsification of reports, forgery, personation, and false documents
This section provides the procedure for making orders under the Act.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 14
See section 6 of the Official Secrets Act 1920 and section 5(6) of the Official Secrets Act 1989.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Related offences
The 1869 "General Orders no. 35" limited collection of information about fortifications, and this was expanded at the time of the Spanish–American War in the late 1890s. Edgar and Schmidt write that when the DSA was passed, the few state secrets laws that existed (35 Stat 1038 and 35 Stat 1097 (1909)) related to "treason, unlawful entry into military bases, and theft of government property".
Defense Secrets Act of 1911 | Brief history of US government secrecy
This section was repealed for the United Kingdom on 1 March 1990. It has been replaced for the United Kingdom by the Official Secrets Act 1989. Cases under this section Command papers on this section
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Section 2 - Wrongful communication, &c. of information
Section 2(1) creates an offence of disclosing information, documents or other articles relating to defence. This section applies only to Crown servants and government contractors.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 2 - Defence
This section was substituted by section 1 of the Official Secrets Act 1939. It now provides: References to a chief officer of police, a Secretary of State and the rank of inspector See section 2(2) of the Official Secrets Act 1939.
Official Secrets Act 1920 | Section 6 – Duty of giving information as to commission of offences
The "Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China" (which is not operative in the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macao) makes it a crime to release a state secret. Under the 1989 ""Law on Guarding State Secrets"," state secrets are defined as those that concern: Secrets can be classified into one of three categories:
National Administration of State Secrets Protection | Overview
As part of this, the committee was to review the application of the Official Secrets Act 1951 and "advance appropriate recommendations on changes in policies and procedures which would contribute to the aim of freedom of information". In 1980 it reported back, recommending the replacement of the Official Secrets Act with a new Official Information Act, based on a principle of openness. In 1981 the committee released a supplementary report with recommendations about the oversight and administration of the Act and the treatment of classified information. In 1982 these ideas were passed into law as the Official Information Act by the National Government.
Official Information Act 1982 | Background
The act has been criticised for ostensibly stifling dissent and reducing transparency in government workings. One statesman has suggested that the act has turned the press into "an alternative Government Gazette". In addition, the usage of the act to classify documents which "cannot by any stretch of the imagination be reasonably confidential or secret" has been criticised.
Official Secrets Act 1972 | Criticism
See "Attorney General v Leveller Magazine Ltd" [1979] AC 440, 68 Cr App R 343, [1979] 2 WLR 247, [1979] 1 All ER 745, [1979] Crim LR 247, HL, reversing [1979] QB 31, [1978] 3 WLR 395, [1978] 3 All ER 731, [1978] Crim LR 627, DC
Official Secrets Act 1920 | Section 8(4)
This subsection reads as amended: The words in square brackets were inserted by section 10 of, and the First Schedule to, the Official Secrets Act 1920. The words at the end of this subsection were repealed by section 11(2) of, and the first paragraph of the Second Schedule to, the Official Secrets Act 1920. They are replaced by section 8(1) of that Act.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Section 1(1)
A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years. Examples Hillaire Barnett described sentences for espionage as "swingeing".
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Sentence
In New Zealand, the relevant legislation is the Official Information Act 1982. This implemented a general policy of openness regarding official documents and replaced the Official Secrets Act.
Freedom of information laws by country | New Zealand
When he did not, they could not provide specific details of what information Sutch had passed to the Soviet diplomat (hence the curious charge that he faced, under the Official Secrets Act, of passing unspecified information to the Soviet Union). Sutch claimed his meetings with Soviet officials were after the Russian ostensibly approached him in his capacity as a stalwart of the NZ Friends of Israel, for information about who were the Zionists in New Zealand, and to discuss China. At trial the SIS claimed that the retired Sutch had obtained official government information to give to the Soviets but was unable to provide details of what information.
Bill Sutch | Charges under the Official Secrets Act
This subsection applies to prosecutions under section 1 of the Official Secrets Act 1920 as it applies to prosecutions under section 1 of this Act. It now reads: The words in square brackets were inserted by the Official Secrets Act 1920.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Section 1(2)
Section 11(3) extends section 9(1) of the Official Secrets Act 1911 (which relates to search warrants).
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 11(3)
Section 13(2) repealed the Official Secrets Act 1889. It was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act 1927 because it was spent by virtue of the Interpretation Act 1889 (effect of repeal).
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Section 13 - Short title and repeal
On May 18, 1940, the US ambassador Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. was informed of this development and agreed to waive Kent's diplomatic immunity. On May 20, Kent was arrested under the Official Secrets Act in a dawn raid at his flat. Officers of MI5 found 1,929 official documents there, and besides Churchill's cables was a book containing the names of people under surveillance by Special Branch and MI5. Searchers also found keys to the US embassy code room. Anna Wolkoff was arrested on the same day and charged with violating the same Act. On May 31, after 11 days of secret detention, the US State Department announced that Kent had been fired and "detained by order of the Home Secretary" but not that he had been arrested under the Official Secrets Act.
Tyler Kent | Arrest, trial and conviction
Shortly after his resignation, "The Observer" began to serialise Ponting's book "The Right to Know: The Inside Story of the Belgrano Affair". The Conservative government reacted by amending the secrets legislation and by introducing the Official Secrets Act 1989. Before the trial, a jury could take the view that if an action could be seen to be in the public interest, the right of the individual to take that action might be justified. As a result of the 1989 modification, that defence was removed. After the enactment, it was taken that public interest' is what the government of the day says it is".
Clive Ponting | Charges under the Official Secrets Act
Section 11(1) inserted section 24(2)(bb) into the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. It also omitted the reference to the Official Secrets Act 1911 in section 24(2)(b) of that Act. It was repealed on 1 October 2002. The repeal was consequential on the replacement of section 24(2) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 with a new Schedule 1A to that Act.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 11(1)
This section provides that a prosecution for an offence under this Act may only be instituted by, or with the consent of, the Attorney General.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Section 8 - Restriction on prosecution
As postal services expanded, governments created official organizations to intercept, decipher, read and reseal letters (e.g., the U.K.'s Secret Office, founded in 1653). In the mid-nineteenth century more complex classification systems were developed to allow governments to manage their information according to the degree of sensitivity. For example, the British Government codified this, to some extent, with the publication of the Official Secrets Act in 1889. Section 1 of the law concerned espionage and unlawful disclosures of information, while Section 2 dealt with breaches of official trust. A public interest defense was soon added to defend disclosures in the interest of the state.
Information security | History
This section now provides: The words omitted were repealed by section 1(1) of, and Part XII of Schedule 1 to, the Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1986. The power conferred by this section has been exercised by the following Orders:
Official Secrets Act 1911 | Section 11- Saving for laws of British possessions
Since then the militaries in many countries have followed suit, such as Australia, China, India, Israel, France, Singapore and the United Kingdom.
Bullpup | Introduction
The House of Lords ruled that the statutory prohibition on agents revealing secret information was proportional and did not contravene Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Michael Tugendhat | Advocate
In June 2002, journalist Iftikhar Gilani was, arrested for violating the OSA 1923 . He was charged under the OSA, with a case under the Obscenity Act added to it. The first military report suggested that the information he was accused of holding was "secret" despite being publicly available. The second military intelligence report contradicted this, stating that there was no "official secret". Even after this, the government denied the opinion of the military and was on the verge of challenging it when the contradictions were exposed in the press. The military reported that, "the information contained in the document is easily available" and "the documents carries no security classified information and the information seems to have been gathered from open sources".
Official Secrets Act (India) | Iftikhar Gilani case
The Official Secrets Act 1923 is used for the protection of official information, mainly related to national security.
Censorship in India | National security
The State Secrecy Law, officially the , Act No. 108 of 2013, is a law in Japan allowing the government to designate defense and other sensitive information as "special secrets" that are protected from public disclosure. Proposed by the second Abe cabinet, the law was approved by the Security Council on October 25, 2013, then was submitted to the National Diet, before being approved there as well on December 6 the same year. The law was promulgated on December 13, 2013, and came into force one year later.
State Secrecy Law | Introduction
A similar law was passed in India in 1889, The Indian Official Secrets Act, which was associated with the British colonial era and used to crackdown on newspapers that opposed the Raj’s policies. A newer version was passed in 1923 that extended to all matters of confidential or secret information for governance. By the time of the First World War, multi-tier classification systems were used to communicate information to and from various fronts, which encouraged greater use of code making and breaking sections in diplomatic and military headquarters. Encoding became more sophisticated between the wars as machines were employed to scramble and unscramble information.
Information security | History
The Official Secrets Act 1972, in its current form (1 January 2006), consists of 31 sections and 1 schedule (including 9 amendments), without separate Part.
Official Secrets Act 1972 | Structure
This section makes it a crime for a crown servant or government contractor to retain information beyond their official need for it, and obligates them to properly protect secret information from accidental disclosure.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 8 - Safeguarding of information
On 6 December 2013, the House of Councillors (Japan) approved the bill of the State Secrecy Law. Shirakawa and physics Nobel laureate Toshihide Maskawa issued a statement saying that the law: "threatens the pacifist principles and fundamental human rights established by the constitution and should be rejected immediately"...(omitted)..."Even in difficult times, protecting the freedom of the press, of thought and expression and of academic research is indispensable."
Hideki Shirakawa | Public issues
It was approved on March 3, 1911. At the time, the United States, under general John J. Pershing, and President William Howard Taft, was fighting the Moro Rebellion in the southern Philippines, a fallout from the Spanish–American War of 10 years earlier. The law specifically mentioned the Philippines. The language of the 1911 act, especially the notion of information 'relating' to the 'national defense' being obtained or delivered to 'those not entitled to receive it', was retained through subsequent American secrecy laws, including the Espionage Act of 1917 and the McCarran Internal Security Act of 1950. Many later Espionage Act cases, for example Gorin v.
Defense Secrets Act of 1911 | History
The Defense Secrets Act of 1911 () was one of the first laws in the United States specifically criminalizing the disclosure of government secrets. It was based in part on the British Official Secrets Act of 1889 and criminalized obtaining or delivering "information respecting the national defense, to which he is not lawfully entitled". Much of the language of the 1911 law was re-used in the Espionage Act of 1917, still in force.
Defense Secrets Act of 1911 | Introduction
About 80% of the Japanese population had opposed the law. Reporters Without Borders called the law "an unprecedented threat to freedom of information". Critics claim that the law is vague on what constitutes a "state secret" and represents a return to pre-WW II militarism when the Peace Preservation Act was used to stifle political opposition. They also contend that the law undermines basic democratic freedom and makes the administration "the judge, jury, and enforcer" in the matter. There have also been claims that the law has led to an "increase in self-control and even self-censorship in the reporting of issues that do not correspond to the government’s political direction." The law was hailed by the American ambassador, Caroline Kennedy, and was seen as a victory for the United States government that had pressured Shinzo Abe and his government to control classified information more tightly.
State Secrecy Law | Reactions
After reviewing the provisions of the act, the Union Home Ministry in July 2017 submitted a report to the Cabinet secretariat. The goal was to amend the act to make it more transparent and in line with the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Official Secrets Act (India) | Reforms
United States" that the act did not violate the freedom of speech of those convicted under its provisions. The constitutionality of the law, its relationship to free speech, and the meaning of its language have been contested in court ever since. Among those charged with offenses under the Act are German-American socialist congressman and newspaper editor Victor L. Berger, labor leader and five-time Socialist Party of America candidate, Eugene V. Debs, anarchists Emma Goldman and Alexander Berkman, former Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society president Joseph Franklin Rutherford, communists Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, "Pentagon Papers" whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, Cablegate whistleblower Chelsea Manning, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, Defense Intelligence Agency employee Henry Kyle Frese, and National Security Agency (NSA) contractor and whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Espionage Act of 1917 | Introduction
of testing sites revealed." According to Yevgenia Albats, "the real state secret revealed by Fyodorov and Mirzayanov was that generals had lied — and were still lying — to both the international community and their fellow citizens." Mirzayanov was released, but kept under house arrest and observation. In 1995 he relocated to the United States where he presently resides, taking a position at Rutgers University in New Jersey.
Vil Mirzayanov | Exposing Russian secrets
In September 1974, Sutch was arrested and charged under the Official Secrets Act 1951 following a series of clandestine meetings with KGB agent Dimitri Rasgovorov, an official of the Soviet Union's embassy in Wellington. Sutch was the only New Zealander ever to stand trial under the espionage provisions of the Official Secrets Act, based on the British Act of 1951 and repealed in 1983. The SIS aimed to catch Sutch passing on information during a meeting at night in a public park, but did not detain Sutch until after Rasgovorov had left. They assumed Sutch would co-operate once caught red handed.
Bill Sutch | Charges under the Official Secrets Act
Virgin Islands. As with other Uniform Acts, some states have modified language in their version of the statute.
Uniform Trade Secrets Act | Introduction
The government formerly asserted that it was not obliged to publicly disclose the details of sites that have been declared National Key Points. The Department of Police refused the requests of the Right2Know Campaign in 2012, and the Democratic Alliance Parliamentary Opposition in 2013, to disclose a list of National Key Points citing security concerns. This refusal was appealed to the Johannesburg High Court, which ordered the government to release the list. On 22 January 2015 the government abandoned its attempt to appeal the ruling, and the list was made public. The act furthermore restricts the disclosure of information regarding security measures implemented at National Key Points and any incident that occurred at a National Key Point, defined as "any occurrence arising out of or relating to terroristic activities, sabotage, espionage or subversion".
National Key Points Act, 1980 | Secrecy
Several private members’ bills that the Campaign drafted and promoted reached the statute book as the: The Campaign also drafted a bill to reform section 2 of the Official Secrets Act 1911, a catch-all provision which made the unauthorised disclosure of any official information a criminal offence. The Protection of Official Information Bill, introduced by Richard Shepherd MP in 1988, would have replaced section 2 with a narrower measure that included a public interest defence. The bill was defeated after the government imposed an unprecedented three-line whip on its own MPs at second reading requiring them to vote it down.
Campaign for Freedom of Information | 1984–1996
The Security of Information Act (R.S.C. 1985, c. O-5), formerly known as the "Official Secrets Act", is an Act of the Parliament of Canada that addresses national security concerns, including threats of espionage by foreign powers and terrorist groups, and the intimidation or coercion of ethnocultural communities in and against Canada.
Security of Information Act | Introduction
Ericson argues that historically the US government had been somewhat lax regarding secrecy. For example, Thomas Paine in 1777 published information from the Committee of Secret Correspondence about France's aid to the American revolutionary war effort; he was simply fired. Alexis de Tocqueville also commented on the casual nature in which he was given original documents into his permanent possession just by asking for them. The storage of documents was haphazard as well. President Jackson even proclaimed he did not care if his political enemies obtained his documents. However, there was a death penalty implemented for certain forms of spying during the Revolutionary War; for more information please see: Intelligence in the American Revolutionary War.
Defense Secrets Act of 1911 | Brief history of US government secrecy
Sections 1(3), 2(1), 3(1), 5(3)(a) and 6(2) provide that the disclosures to which they apply are not an offence unless they are "damaging". Section 4(2) is similar.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Requirement that the disclosure be "damaging"
The Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China (which is not operative in the Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macau) makes it a crime to release a state secret. Regulation and enforcement is carried out by the National Administration for the Protection of State Secrets. Under the 1989 "Law on Guarding State Secrets," state secrets are defined as those that concern: Secrets can be classified into three categories:
Classified information | People's Republic of China
Prior to 1982, official information was assumed to be the property of the government, not the people. Under the Official Secrets Act 1951, disclosure of information by public servants without specific reason and authorisation was a criminal offence. The law "positively discouraged information release". However, from the 1960s onwards, there was increasing pressure for openness. In 1962, a Royal Commission of Inquiry into state services declared that "Government administration is the public’s business, and that the people are entitled to know more than they do of what is being done, and why." The creation of the Office of the Ombudsman and changes of administrative law created a presumption that people were entitled to know the reasons for decisions made about them.
Official Information Act 1982 | Background
The offences under sections 1(3), 2(1), 3(1) and 4(1) can be committed only by persons who are or have been, and the offence under section 8(1) can be committed only by persons who are, Crown servants or government contractors. The offences under the Act, that can be committed only by persons who, as the case may be, are or have been Crown servants, government contractors, or members of the security and intelligence services, can be committed only where the information, document or other article in question is or has been in the possession of the person in question by virtue of their position as such.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Capacity
United States, involved arguments about the exact meaning of terms like 'national defense'.
Defense Secrets Act of 1911 | History
The journalists had published the passphrase as the title of a chapter in a book on the process of investigating and publishing the stories believing that the encrypted file had only been provided to them with that passphrase and not realising the entire encrypted file was still online.
Contents of the United States diplomatic cables leak (Australia) | Introduction
On November 7, 1977, "Law" 801 came into force and it imposed secrecy on "acts, documents, news, activities and anything else whose circulation might result in damages to the integrity of the democratic State". In April 2008, a government decree stated that classified documents cannot be kept secret for more than 30 years, giving accessibility to documents that had been made secret more than 30 years before. The end of the State secrecy "does not automatically lead to the revocation or disclosure of classified documents"
Terrorism in Italy | "Omissis" and state secrecy
From 1984 to 2003, any telecommunications station or office belonging to, or occupied by, a public telecommunications operator was a prohibited place for the purposes of this Act.
Official Secrets Act 1911 | History
This section relates to disclosure of information which would assist a criminal or the commission of a crime. This section applies only to crown servants and government contractors.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Section 4 - Crime and special investigation powers
In the decades before, the 1952 Special Criminal Act and the 1954 United States Mutual Security Act Secrets Protection Law protected military equipment that the U. S. provided for Japan. With the "War on Terror" and the challenges by China and North Korea and a number of events where military security was breached by Japan, it was argued that the government established the law to strengthen its relationship in the context of its partnership with the United States. In a 2016 assessment of the impact of the law, Aditi Razdan indicated that while the law may have a chilling effect on the media, the extent of this is difficult to measure, as "(w)hen a state secret itself is not defined, it is nearly impossible to determine what media outlets can no longer report on." In the annual ranking of global press freedom Reporters Without Borders lowered Japan from the 11th place in 2010 to the 72nd place in 2016 because of the law about "state secrets".
State Secrecy Law | Reactions
50 cases of violation of the Official Secrets Act were registered in the country since 2014. Of these 50 cases, 30 were registered in 2016, nine in 2015 and 11 in 2014 according to Union Minister of state for Home Hansraj Ahir. Of the 30 cases registered in 2016, eight were lodged in Tamil Nadu, followed by five each in Punjab and Uttar Pradesh.
Official Secrets Act (India) | 50 cases of Official Secrets Act violation since 2014
Classified information has been governed by various Official Secrets Acts, the latest being the Official Secrets Act 1989. Until 1989 requested information was routinely kept secret invoking the public interest defence; this was largely removed by the 1989 Act. The Freedom of Information Act 2000 largely requires information to be disclosed unless there are good reasons for secrecy. Confidential government papers such as the yearly cabinet papers used routinely to be withheld formally, although not necessarily classified as secret, for 30 years under the thirty year rule, and released usually on a New Year's Day; freedom of information legislation has relaxed this rigid approach.
Declassification | United Kingdom
In the 1990s, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan deplored the "culture of secrecy" made possible by the Espionage Act, noting the tendency of bureaucracies to enlarge their powers by increasing the scope of what is held "secret". In the late 1990s, Wen Ho Lee of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) was indicted under the Act. He and other national security professionals later said he was a "scapegoat" in the government's quest to determine if information about the W88 nuclear warhead had been transferred to China. Lee had made backup copies at LANL of his nuclear weapons simulations code to protect it in case of a system crash.
Espionage Act of 1917 | 1990s critiques
Secrecy is a 2008 documentary film directed by Harvard University professors Peter Galison and Robb Moss. According to its website, it "is a film about the vast, invisible world of government secrecy," and features interviews with a variety of people on all sides of the secrecy issue, including Steven Aftergood (of Federation of American Scientists), Tom Blanton (of the National Security Archive), James B. Bruce (who was a senior staff member to the Iraq Intelligence Commission), Barton Gellman (a "Washington Post" journalist), Melissa Boyle Mahle (a former CIA officer), the plaintiffs in "United States v. Reynolds" (1953) (the case which established the State Secrets Privilege in the United States), Siegfried Hecker (former director of Los Alamos National Laboratory), Mike Levin (a former member of the National Security Agency), and Neal Katyal and Charles Swift (the lawyers for the defendant in "Hamdan v.
Secrecy (film) | Introduction
Offences under any provision of the Act, other than sections 8(1) or 8(4) or 8(5), committed by any person in the United Kingdom, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands, or in any colony, or committed by British citizens or Crown servants in any place, are cognisable as offences under the law of the United Kingdom.
Official Secrets Act 1989 | Extra-territorial jurisdiction
In 1977, Denning upheld the deportation of Mark Hosenball, a journalist who had worked on a story which referred to the existence of GCHQ, which was considered to be a state secret. In the ruling, he argued that the government's decisions in these cases were beyond legal review, writing: "There is a conflict here between the interests of national security on the one hand and the freedom of the individual on the other. The balance between these two is not for a court of law. It is for the Home Secretary. He is the person entrusted by Parliament with the task.
Tom Denning, Baron Denning | National security
The first act of the next Government was abolishing this order. Similarly in the context of the time false rumors were spread about alleged homosexualism, alleged use of Communist privileges for entering high school and/or university and alleged family connections with the Communistr party.
Philip Dimitrov | Biography
This section provides: "In the vicinity of" This expression means "in or in the vicinity of".
Official Secrets Act 1920 | Section 3 – Interfering with officers of the police or members of His Majesty’s forces
People working with sensitive information are commonly required to sign a statement to the effect that they agree to abide by the restrictions of the Official Secrets Act. This is popularly referred to as "signing the Official Secrets Act". Signing this has no effect on which actions are legal, as the act is a law, not a contract, and individuals are bound by it whether or not they have signed the act. Signing it is intended more as a reminder to the person that they are under such obligations. To this end, it is common to sign this statement both before and after a period of employment that involves access to information classified as 'secret' (e.g.
Official Secrets Act | United Kingdom
He rejects the allegations of having "eight secret accounts in Swiss banks", stating that the people responsible for the 'slander' will "be crushed under these claims, will be finished and will disappear".
Contents of the United States diplomatic cables leak (analysis of individual leaders) | Turkey
This section provides the penalties for the offences under this Act and under the Official Secrets Act 1911.
Official Secrets Act 1920 | Section 8 – Provisions as to trial and punishment of offences