Subscribe to our feed
Follow us on twitterSupport for Gary McKinnon
23rd October 2009 06:00 | by Eric Priezkalns
I am not going to make an argument for supporting hacker Gary McKinnon in his bid to overturn the decision to extradite him to the US. If even the Daily Mail believes he should be tried in an English court, then I find it hard to believe that the average Pirate is not well aware of Gary's situation. Most of you will have strong feelings about it too. I admit that I do. The goal of this post is not to argue for my opinion - policy should never be made on the fly - but to ask for your help in deciding if, and how, the party should support Gary.
How far should the party engage with and assist Gary's campaign? The issues do not fit easily with the core three policy pillars. On the other hand, we are talking about the wellbeing of a real human being, and the question of how to apply national laws in the era of a global internet. You can contribute to determining the party's direction and whether the issues raised by Gary's case should fall within the scope of our manifesto. This will also help us to judge if the party should provide more hands-on assistance to the people campaigning on Gary's behalf. You can do so by responding with your opinions here, or by voting on the party's forum.
Time is running out for Gary. Whilst all policy creation should come from the party's democratic process, your response will assist us to make the right decisions in what may be the final weeks of Gary's bid to remain in the UK. Please help.
7 comments
I agree, I think Gary should be tried here. I think the allegations against him are ridiculous - especially the amount of monetary damage he is meant to have caused.
Gary is a very unlucky guy, it didn't take any real ability to do what he did. Trying default windows usernames and passwords is hardly an advanced technique.
Garry should be tried here & I support his plight.
Having said that, I don't think PPUK should explicitly support him - it's not our field and we don't need to be seen to support scanning pentagon computers for machines with no root passwords.
I'd prefer we let members make up their own mind.
Absolutely, he committed a crime here, so therefore he should be tried here. He's not a US citizen, so there's no reason they can prosecute him while being in a foreign country either.
If we are looking to change the law in the UK, it will be pointless if our extradition treaties allow us to be prosecuted abritarily elsewhere. If I download a file in the uk from a server in the US and it is deemed criminal in the US, would I be subject to extradition? For instance if that file contained threats to kill the president (a crime in the US, but not here).
I think the issue falls fully outside the three core policies of the party and that the party needs to maintain a strictly narrow focus to make a difference.
Having said that, I see no reason to discourage individuals voicing their support for him.
I think internet policy in general lies within our core competency. And it's the sort of thing the voters will expect us to have polices about.
While Gary's alleged victim is in the US, he allegedly committed the crime here.
Typically, when a crime is committed the Crown Prosecution Service take up the case, on the grounds that criminal law has been broken. They do not run the case according to the alleged victim's desires.
In this case the alleged victim is the military of the most powerful nation on earth. Even so they should not get their own way over our sovereign judiciary process.
I'm also extremely wary of the monetary value placed on the "damage" that Gary is supposed to have caused. How much of that money was spent fixing the damage, and how much was spent fixing the security problems that he allegedly exploited?
I say we support Gary in his bid to be tried in the country in which he is alleged to have committed a crime.