Journalists say free press threatened by Army subpoena

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
December 28, 2006

Contacts:
Sarah Olson, Journalist: (415) 298-5573,
solson75@yahoo.com
Dahr Jamail, Journalist: (206) 384-6601,
mail@dahrjamailiraq.com
David Green, Attorney representing Sarah Olson: (510)
208-7744
Dan Siegel, Attorney representing Dahr Jamail: (510)
839-1200

Journalists say free press threatened by Army subpoena


San Francisco, CA – In a move that threatens the First
Amendment rights of journalists, the U.S. Army has
subpoenaed journalist Sarah Olson to testify at the
January 4 pre-trial hearing in the court-martial of
Lt. Ehren Watada. The Army placed another journalist,
Dahr Jamail, on the prosecution witness list.

Both journalists say the Army’s attempt to compel
their participation in the court-martial threatens
press freedom and chills free speech.

U.S. Army 1st Lt. Ehren Watada became the first
commissioned officer to refuse his orders to deploy to
Iraq on June 22, 2006. In his upcoming February
court-martial Lt. Watada faces one charge of missing
troop movement, and four counts of conduct unbecoming
an officer. Each of the later four charges relates to
Lt. Watada’s public explanations of his refusal to
deploy to Iraq. If convicted of all charges Lt. Watada
faces six years in prison, four of which would be for
speaking to the press.

Independent journalist Sarah Olson interviewed Lt.
Watada last May. The Army says statements Watada made
during Olson’s interview constitute one charge of
conduct unbecoming an officer, and wants Olson to
verify those statements in a military court. Olson
says: “It’s my job to report the news, not to
participate in a government prosecution. Testifying
against my source would turn the press into an
investigative tool of the government and chill
dissenting voices in the United States.”

Independent journalist Dahr Jamail reported on Lt.
Watada’s address to the Veterans for Peace convention
last August. The Army says it wants him to
authenticate his reporting of the event. Jamail says:
“I don’t believe that reporters should be put in the
position of having to participate in a prosecution.
This is particularly poignant in this case, where
journalists would be used to build a case against free
speech for military personnel.”

The journalists say once the press is seen as the eyes
and ears of the government, dissenting voices are less
likely to express themselves publicly. A free and open
exchange of ideas is the life-blood of democracy, and
it is in the public interest to have a free debate on
disparate views of current political issues.

#####