CIA VERSUS THE PRIVATE CITIZEN

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00001R000400180016-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: November 11, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 22, 1999
• Sequence Number: 16
• Publication Date: December 23, 1966
• Content Type: NSPR

0
CPYRGHT
CPYRGHT
Sanitized - Approved For Release :
Paz Pac> iv^~`
FORT ?AYN'E, IND.
r:
- 77 , 258
DEC Z 3 1966
CIA Versus the Private Citizen
GUEST EDITORIAL
An undercover agent of the Central In-
telligence Agency has escaped liability for
slander through a federal court ruling that
he need not testify in a suit against him.
.The decision throws the protective cloak of
"national security" over a federal agent
and appears to leave the ordinary citizen
defenseless against possible malicious defa-
mation by. a government employe.
Chief Judge Roszel Hyde of the U. S.
District Court in Baltimore last week dis-
missed a slander suit against Juri Raus,
an Estonian emigre and agent of the CIA.
Rails had been sued by another Estonian
emigre, Eerik Heine, on charges of false-
ly naming Heine before a public meeting
of anti-Communist refugees as an"agent of
the Soviet secret police.
The issue is not the truth of the accusa-
tion - a question which has not been con-
sidered by any' court - but the fact that
the CIA has been upheld in its interference
with the administration of civil Justice. As
the CIA saw the matter, it couldn't. win,
however the case came out. If it had to pay
damages to Heine for slandering him, this
would have cast discredit on CIA sources
of information,; it it were to prove the
truth of the accusation, this would have re-
vealed those sources.
Therefore, the CIA. refused to let Raus
testify beyond the statement that he was a
CIA agent acting under orders in accusing
lie court that "it would be contrary to the i
ecurity interests of the United States for '
illy further information pertaining to the
se and employment. of Juri Raus by the I
gency in connection with Eerik Heine to
e disclosed,
Judge Hyde ruled that the "activities of.
he CIA to protect its'foreign- intelligence
ources ... are within the powers granted ,?.
y Congress to the CIA," He added that
f Raus testified without consent of the.:
gency he would "not-only be violating the {
ee ecy agreement (which he signed when
o joined the CIA) but might also violate
he statute prohibiting unlawful disclosure
f confidential' information respecting the'l
ational defense."
}
The judge had an indirect Supreme Court
recedent for his ruling - Barr vs. Mateo,
5-4 decision that government employes
acting in good frith in line of duty are im-
nune from liability for public statements
node - about individuals or organizations. "I
3ut what is "good faith"? When is,.it in,
'line of duty?" And, looking at the Raus-
Ieine case, what if the employe has been -
rdcred by his superiors to lie about some- 'r
no in the interest of "national security"? ?"
We arc ' concerned if the decision as to., what is a genuine security matter and what
s merely an inconvenience or embarrass-'
1
ent for the CIA is decided not by the
outs but. by the ;director of, the CIA.
Sanitized - Approved For Release : CIA-RDP75-00001 R000400180016-8