ABOVE THE LAW

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00001R000400190119-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: November 17, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 28, 2000
• Sequence Number: 119
• Publication Date: April 22, 1966
• Content Type: NSPR

wnsxllvcYOly rosy APR 2 2
Approved For Rel~s~ ~~~~~ CIA-RDP75-OOb'01 F2a0
AUove ~Iie ~,ccz,v ;,
The Central Intelligence Agency is currently en-'
;gaged in an attempt to deny any means of .redress
? to a man whose character ]t has ruthlessly assassi-,
nated. By an open admission o[ its deputy director,
a CIA operative named Juri Raus was instructed,,
,to defame an Estonian, Ecrik Ilcine, active in tha
' : ? Estonian community in tiie United States by bruit-~
'~ ing it about that 114r. Aeine was a covert Soviet
,agent. Mr" Heine sued for slander. Mr. Raus
' does not 'deny that he made the o(Iending state-~;
ments. At the same time he makes no eil'ort,.
. , . , `to defend them as truthful lIc merely submits '
to the court a CIA assertion that he said what E~
' ' he said an 'instructions from leis superiors, that
.what he said is therefore privileged and that Mr.'~
' , Iieine's suit ought to be dismissed on these grounds.;
. The law is probably on the side of the CIA. In~
1959, the Supreme Court decided, by five to four, '
~. a case, Barr v. Matteo, holding that two subordinate ` '
'
' officials of th'e OfT'ice of Rent Stabilization had ? an ~.
?,. ~ absolute privilege against a suit for libel based j
upon a press release ~ they had issued. Chief
Justice Warren, in a dissenting opinion, said'
prophetically and, we think,- altogether soundly
~ that the decision would have the "effect of ~ de=?
'~ terring the desirable public discussion of all
' aspects of our Government and the conduct of,
its officials. It will sanctify the powerful ands
silence debate. This is ~ a much more serious ?
. danger than the possibility that a Government.'
official might occasionally be called upon to de?
~. ;'fend his actions. and to respond in damages for;;
~~ a malicious defamation."
1~Ve make' no judgment as to the merits of the?
controversy between Messrs Raus and Heine. But,
' we think it intolerable that government o[ncials'~
~sho~uld io an unliii~ te~ i'~Ticense or s ander. If,
has the ~CI~'asse~t would be contrary to the
security i~nterests,of the United States" to release
`the infrorma~ion relevant to Mr. Raus's defense,}
' `then the CIA ought to indemnify Mr. Heine for
`the injury done to him. The United States has ~
other interests than security; it has an interest
in justice and' in the integrity of its courts. We'
;think that a federal judge ought to have th~.~
'power to say to the CIA what Judge ~.lbe~t Reeves,
:said to the ifiBI when that agency tried to With-.`
hold relevant information in the trial of Judith
Coplon in 1949; "If it turns out that the Govern-i
~ment has come into court exposing itself, then,!
`it? will have to take the peril.. If it embarrasses.
~ the Government to disclose relevant material, then
the Government ought not to be hcre.'? ,
. This case raises some other vital questions. ~
!What on earth is the CIA doing trying to manipu- ~
" late tl~e affairs of the Estonian community !n the
. ~ United States? This kind of interference in the
.political actions of foreign nationality groups ~
amounts, in our judgment, to a most dangerous j
. ;.sort of subversion, a pollution ~ of one of the
~
? `main currents of American political life. , 'i'he
Approvea ror Key . ~ ~~