A View from Atlanta: Deconstructing the Illusion of “Espionage”

by Rodolfo Davalos
August 12, 2007
Reprinted from Juventud Rebelde

The allegation of “Conspiracy to gather and to transmit information on National Defense”is the technical charge, according to US criminal law (18USC & 794), commonly called “Conspiracy to commit espionage”. It is without doubt the central topic of the legal process against five Cuban prisoners wrongly held in the United States. One should recall that the Miami press once called theirs “the spy trial” a description that used on other occasions in El Nuevo Herald during the trial itself.

For that crime, three of the men were each unjustly sentenced to life imprisonment. What is necessary is to rebut those accusations, to demonstrate the lack of evidence about the charges and reveal the innocence of the accused. This will be central task of the defense lawyers this coming August 20 before the three-judge panel in charge of hearing appeals presented to the Eleventh Circuit of Appeals in Atlanta. This issue triggers discussion when one raises the case of the Five before any audience. The accusation of “espionage” (generically speaking) it tends to create concern by anyone who hears that dark and menacing description. Nonetheless, where the true conspiracy against the Five existed was on the part of the government of the United States, which crafted a macabre plan to discredit the accused and to present them as dangerous criminals, as enemies of the American people.

When unable to try the men for espionage, they accused them of “conspiring” to commit it, something ethereal, subjective. The presumption of innocence was reversed, since what was alleged by the prosecution was that “they had the intention of appropriating” supposedly “classified information” that never appeared, that has not been seen, that was not presented – nor could be it, which was never the intention. But that name is there in the charges, in the atmosphere that was created by the prosecution in the trial, and that they conveyed to the jury. The result: three sentences for life imprisonment.

One time I gave information on the unjust process to a German lawyer. He later spoke with me for several hours about how the crime of espionage is completely different from what was carried out by the Five. The accusation was manipulated and tendentious, and what was even worse was the information given out by the press in Miami. The experienced and recognized lawyer, a progressive, previously did not have the correct information, yet since then he has never taken his eye off the case. Moreover, he continues to contribute his abilities to the just cause.

What is important is to explain what the Five were doing in United States and why. I remember that at the beginning this was a topic on the Cuban news commentary program “The Round Table”. I was coming home one night after the program and ran into an old friend — a neighbour, a revolutionary above any suspicion. He yelled at me from saying, “Very well, professor, very well.” Yet immediately he came closer and whispered to me about the trial. “But they are spies,” he said. I couldn’t believe it, I froze! If that old revolutionary believed that the Five were spies what would others think? I invited him to come into the house and I explained to him:

“There are not spies without espionage” Espionage is a crime, and like all crimes it has to be “codified” in criminal law, that is to say described in the penal code as constituting an illegal action and therefore punishable.

The crime of espionage, according to American federal law itself, consists of appropriating, gathering and transmitting information pertaining to National Defense – information that is classified and protected by the State and would cause damage to United States if known by non-authorized parties.

What does that have to do that with the actions of the Five, with monitoring terrorist organizations and groups? Were there any classified documents protected by the State or relating to National Defense? This question was asked during the trial to US Army General Edgard Atkenson, the former head of the Office of Intelligence and an instructor at the Intelligence School of the Defense Department. He responded with a categorical “No.” They were not “spying.”

With this information, my neighbour ended up convinced that night, as convinced the three judges from Atlanta will end up.

If there is justice in Atlanta, this will end the dirty game of allegations of “spies” that has kept the five men in jail for nine years, despite the fact that known anti-Cuba terrorists Luis Posada Carriles “peacefully” walks the streets of Miami. Justice cannot permit a similar infamy.