[Music]
Herald: So: since the Snowden movies, or
movie, and documentations, we know there were many really, really awesome people
involved in the escape of Edward Snowden. Today, we will hear a little bit more
about the personal sacrifices and big risks these people took to shelter and
protect Edward Snowden. So, first, I will give you Sönke Iwersen. An applause
for him please. He will start the whole thing with a little bit of backstory,
after that we will have Robert Tibbo and live on the screen, Edward Snowden; I'm
looking forward to it. But first, a big applause again for Sönke Iwersen.
*Applause* — Iwersen: Good evening, my name is Sönke Iwersen.
I'm a journalist for the German Handelsblatt, and today the story I will tell
you is, you could put it on the motto “No deed, no good deed, goes unpunished”.
In German: “Keine gute Tat bleibt ungestraft”. It’s about 100 years old
and it holds true for Mr. Snowden, who is now still in his exile in Moscow, and whom
Mr. Trump would like to shoot—those are his words. And it also holds true for the
people who've helped Edward Snowden, during a time when nobody able … nobody
else was able to help him. And these people are still suffering under inhuman
conditions. You can see them here, I will give you the names in a few seconds. To
start, this is the most famous story that has been told of Edward Snowden. The movie
Citizenfour by lawyer Laura Poitras, a very good movie. But there's a hole in the
story—let's see. Let's go back for just a few seconds to June 10th, 2013. which is
the first day all of us here have ever heard the name Edward Snowden. It was the
day that his interview was streamed by the Guardian, and he uncovered the massive
surveillance of the US and the entire world by the US government. And their
intelligence systems. And, well, this is the Mira hotel, the interview took place
at that hotel. He was hiding here. In room 1014. This is a scene from the movie where
you can see him just after he realizes that he doesn't know what to do next. He's
just been interviewed. This is the morning after the interview. And the journalists
have left—Greenwald has left, he can't go back because people like me, other
journalists have been… they have found him. And they would follow him back to Snowden
if he went back to the hotel. So Laura Poitras is filming this, but she can't
help him. And in the movie, there's a skip— there's … it just skips over 14 days. The
next famous scene we have all seen is Edward Snowden at the Hong Kong
International Airport—he's back actually, holding a ticket to Moscow in
his hand. And that's it. The next time we saw him again was in Moscow … we
saw pictures of him was in Moscow. But that was 14 years later. So I don't know
about you, but I was always … had I for a long time I've been wondering—well, how
did he do that? 14 days, the most hunted man on the planet, the NSA, CIA, Hong Kong
police, all my colleagues—we're all looking for him, but nobody found him. So
where did he go? And who helped him? And I was lucky enough, two years ago, to meet
the people who hid Edward Snowden. It's very … it was hard for me to believe at first
that these people were actually able to do that and … but the next things that happen
may be even harder to believe. I'll just introduce them quickly, because we're
coming to the main show in a few minutes. This is Ajit—he's a former Sri Lankan
soldier. He has been stranded in Hong Kong. While he was; his backstory: he
was captured by the military, he was tortured, twice, then he was smuggled
into Hong Kong and his smuggler left him without his passport in the middle of
Hong Kong. And Ajit was stranded there and has been stranded there for … I think
since 2005 now. And in 2013, he met by pure chance Edward Snowden, who was a
refugee at that time, suddenly, himself. And Ajit became Snowden's bodyguard for
those two weeks in Hong Kong. He had military training, there wasn't any
shootouts, but Ajit made sure that Snowden stayed safe and was not found and
detected. This is Supun—another refugee. He's also from Sri Lanka, he was also
tortured, beaten by the police and fled to Hong Kong. His wife Nadeeka—she was
tortured, raped, beaten, when she went to the police, she was sent out and beaten in
front of the police station again. So she also fled, and in Hong Kong she met Supun
and they had these children. Sethumdi, the daughter on the right, and Dinath, he was
just maybe six months when I met him two years ago. This is Vanessa. Vanessa is a
Filipina—she was also raped in … at her home. The police wouldn't help her because
her rapist had political connections, and after trying several times, she finally
made it to Hong Kong where she applied for asylum and never got it. Asylum seekers in
Hong Kong are not like asylum seekers here —they have no rights at all, hardly any
help, they're not allowed to work, they get food stamps. But for example, no stamps
for diapers if you have children, small children. So what do you do if you don't get …
You're not allowed to work, you're not allowed to steal.
If you're caught working, you can be jailed for 22 months.
Which is longer than you can be jailed for drug trafficking.
That's her daughter, Nadeeka. Vanessa did a lot for Edward Snowden. She
would … she hid his passport—she cooked for him, she brought in the newspaper, and
she and her daughter sang birthday songs for Edward Snowden's 30th birthday. So how
did this all come out? Why, why was I able to find this story? In 2016 this movie
came out—another movie, but this time a fictional, part-fictional, part-documentary
maybe by Oliver Stone. And it was clear that the refugees would play a part in
this movie. So, after a long time of thinking, they were willing to talk to a
journalist and have their story be told rather than rely on a Hollywood director.
So here you have the two main actors —Joseph Gordon-Levitt on the left
and Shailene Woodley, and of course director Oliver Stone on the right. And
now, we come to the most important people of the night—on the left,
Edward Snowden. And on the right, his lawyer in Hong Kong, who made all this
possible. Because, of course, four refugees in Hong Kong couldn't just meet
Edward Snowden on the street. It was this man, Robert Tibbo, who brought them
together. It was a coincidence, again. He was called out of the blue on the morning
of the 10th of June in 2013 because Edward Snowden didn't know what to do, and
nobody, neither Snoden nor any of the Guardian people had planned how to, what
to do on the next morning. So, this lawyer was called up—a human rights lawyer who
has been working with refugees. And the cases of Ajit, Nadeeka, Supun, and Vanessa
for years. And when he was suddenly tasked with finding a solution for this
unbelievable problem—hiding the most sought-after, the most wanted man on the
planet, he came up with this crazy idea: well, let's hide them with other refugees.
Let's hide them, let's hide Mr. Snowden where nobody would ever look—in the
slums of Hong Kong. And it worked. For two weeks, Edward Snowden hid in the tiny
apartments with sometimes no bathrooms, and was undetected by the entire Secret
Service force of several nations. And, well, when I found this, I do what most
journalists would do—I wrote a very long story. This was in 2016, we named it
“Snowdens Geheimnis”—Snowden's Secret—, and I detailed all the stories of Vanessa,
Supun, Ajit, and Nadeeka, and how they met and saved Edward Snowden. So the
story was very well received—a lot of calls came in wanting to donate, people
wanted to donate all over the world really because we also put out a English
version of this. And we were able to funnel a lot of money to the refugees. Of
course not enough, but more than before. And just briefly, Rob told me to
put this up here—it was awarded the Kurt Tucholsky award this year, and …
[Applause] Thank you. This is one year ago, not here,
but in Hamburg. Same place, another time. When Rob and I told the story to the CCC
audience for the first time and things were actually looking up—we were getting
money, we had connections to lawyers in Canada who wanted to bring them to Canada,
because these people cannot stay in Hong Kong. But as I said before—no good deed
goes unpunished, and it hasn't. And I would like to now call Robert onto the
stage, because what happens next will show you that certain governments in this
world do not want people to help those in need. On the contrary, if you help
somebody who's in danger for his life, you will get punished yourself. I think that's
the story, that's the lesson that is being taught right now, and has been taught
for the last two years ever since this story became public. Rob?
[Applause] Robert Tibbo: Well thank you, thank you
for being here tonight. And thank you so much for the interest that you have in my
clients. Mr. Snowden, of course, but also the seven refugees who acted to protect
the world's most significant whistleblower. Now what I'd like to do is
like to start from where I left off last year. And this, the slide that you have
here, was on the same day—the same date last year. And what has not been disclosed
is after this talk a year ago I had left the auditorium, and I received phone calls
from Hong Kong. The Sri Lankan police had flown into Hong Kong, the Criminal
Investigation Division, targeting the Snowden refugees—seeking to engage them.
Immediately, we took action: a legal team and those people helping the Snowden
refugees to move them to safe houses. So what I'd like to do is to go through
what's happened to the Snowden refugees this last year, because they've had a
terrible time. They've been targeted by the Sri Lankan government, and they've
been targeted by the Hong Kong government, and they've been punished by the Hong Kong
government. Simply for their association with Mr. Snowden. Last September, their
seven cases were called up by the Immigration Department after the
Immigration Department just ignored their cases for about five years. And their
cases had nothing in common in terms of the incidents in their home countries, but
the time that they were targeted for persecution or torture, ill-treatment. The
time they left Sri Lanka in the Philippines. And even the time they were
in Hong Kong when they raised their refugee and asylum claims. And the only
factor that they had in common was the kindness, humanity, empathy, and
compassion they showed Mr. Snowden. And the Hong Kong government, instead of
recognizing the extraordinary deeds they did, instead took the opposite approach.
And last September, the Hong Kong government utilized different departments
to punish the Snowden refugees. Vanessa, Supun, Nadeeka went to the Social Welfare
Department, which uses a Swiss contractor —International Social Services. And when
they went there to get the little financial support they're given which does
not meet their basic needs, International Social Services, on behalf of the Social
Welfare department, started asking them about Mr. Snowden in private, information
about Mr. Snowden. And these extraordinary people told the government that they're
not going to breach Mr. Snowden's confidence. So they were punished—they
had their food taken away from them, they had their housing taken away from them,
transport money. The little girl in the front, on the right hand side,
($NAME), she was denied access to education for one year. The little girl on
the left, Vanessa's daughter, Kiana - she was denied education as well. And
fortunately there was an extraordinary group in Hong Kong who ran a private
school who brought her in. So through last September to December, the only assistance
they had from the government was stripped away simply because they refused to
answer questions about Mr. Snowden. Now parallel to this time, in Sri Lanka, the
Sri Lankan local government, the Sri Lankan criminal investigation police
Criminal Investigation Division— renowned for its use of torture as one of
its standard investigative tools in Sri Lanka—and the military, went to Ajif
the soldier's house. Ajif is standing in the middle, on my right-hand side. The
Sri Lankan police CID also went to Supun's family's homes—they threatened the
families, they harassed the families, they wanted the locations telephone numbers of
the families in Hong Kong, and they wanted the names and telephone numbers and
addresses of the friends or people they knew in Hong Kong. But the Snowden
refugees have extraordinary parents, and they did not speak up. They refused to
assist, despite the threats. [Applause]
With the Sri Lankan government using oppressive means to get intelligence on my
clients in September and October, they then flew into Hong Kong in October, and
through to December. And it was in December that a number of witnesses
were able to find out the Sri Lankan Criminal Investigation Division Department
were targeting my clients. Now, I informed, as their lawyer, I informed the
Immigration Department. The Immigration Department did nothing. We tried making a
complaint to the police, the Hong Kong police. They just told us the Immigration
Department was conducting the investigations. Which wasn't true. And
finally, by April, the Hong Kong police agreed they would allow my clients to make
a formal complaint to the police about the Sri Lankan police CID coming to Hong Kong.
And threatening their safety, their security, and their lives. So for four
months, the Hong Kong government, the Hong Kong police, failed to provide state
protection, they failed to investigate they failed to act promptly. I brought my
clients in to the Hong Kong police to make their complaint. The police didn't want to
take their complaint initially—they said they had a few questions. And they had a
list of questions on a A4 size paper. They asked my clients about Mr. Snowden. They
asked about Mr. Snowden's movements in Hong Kong. The police's responsibilities
were to address the threat from the Sri Lankan police, not asking questions about
Mr. Snowden's movements in June 2013. Clearly, the police, as with the Social
Welfare Department, as with the contractor ISS, has no interests in protecting and
providing support for my clients. Their interest was to gather intelligence
on Mr. Snowden. I put a stop to that—my
instructing solicitor Jonathan Man was with me. And eventually police complaints
were made. But the police weren't interested in investigating the Sri Lankan
police. I had it, I had put it to the investigating officers—all you have to
do is to go to the Directorate of immigrations office in Hong Kong, and ask
for the files of all Sri Lankan police officers who travel to Hong Kong between
October and December 2016. That is because every Sri Lankan who travels to Hong Kong
must obtain a visa from the Chinese embassy in Colombo. They must provide a
photograph, and they must provide the nature of their employment. Or who they're
employed by. And the police did nothing. The Hong Kong government did nothing. And
it would have been a simple task—the Hong Kong government could have said,
“there were no police officers coming to Hong Kong from Sri Lanka at that time
because we have no records of such.” And the fact that they didn't investigate
that, or at least disclose that they've checked their files, indicates that
there's only one sole inference to be made —that the Sri Lankan police were in fact
in Hong Kong. Aside from the fact that there were a number of witnesses. Then, in
August of this year, the witnesses to the Sri Lankan police coming to Hong Kong and
targeting the Snowden refugees were grabbed by the police. They had committed
no crimes, they had done nothing wrong, they were simply grabbed by six officers—
two immigration enforcement officers, four police officers from the Criminal
Investigation Department in Hong Kong. They were put into a van, and they were
held, unlawfully, on two days. And the first question the police asked the first
detainee was about Mr. Snowden. And the police were trying to make a case that the
Snowden refugees made up the story. In October, I was informed that the Hong Kong
police finished the investigation and there'd be no further investigation. But a
few weeks later another witness was arrested by the Hong Kong police, again,
targeting the Snowden refugees and those people acting for them. Now, why, why
would the Sri Lankan police be coming to Hong Kong? And Hong Kong has a history of
allowing foreign agents to come into its jurisdiction, and to target, engage, and
even extraordinarily rendition civilians in Hong Kong. Sami al-Saadi in 2003,
Hong Kong assisted the UK and US governments to have him rendition in a
private flight to Libya where he was tortured. The booksellers in Hong Kong a
couple years ago were renditioned by the mainland Chinese security, out of Hong
Kong in Thailand. And in January this year, a Chinese billionaire, Xiao Jianhua, was taken
out of the Four Seasons Hotel, a Canadian hotel, in Hong Kong. And renditioned
across the border—and he's disappeared. So my clients have had a very hard time.
I've been targeted myself—the Hong Kong director of immigration has sought to have
me removed from the cases. Has made complaints to the Bar Association, and
without merit. They've reactivated dozens of cases right before the Snowden refugee
appeals. The Hong Kong government has simply acted egregiously and projecting
its authority with impunity. The Sri Lankan police, I believe, came in to Hong
Kong simply because the Hong Kong government has created an environment
where Hong Kong has not held any foreign agent accountable for their unlawful
activities in Hong Kong. And by the way, mainland China, the Chinese government, is
the biggest arms provider to the Sri Lankan government. So they have a very
close military relationship there. Now, strategy was put into place where we found
myself and the lawyers you can see in the photo—on the far right hand side is
Jonathan Mann, beside him is Michael Simkin from Canada, from Montreal Quebec,
Canada. Myself, originally from Montreal Quebec, Canada. Marc-André Séguin, the lead
lawyer in Canada. And on the far left is Francis Tourigny. They filed refugee claims
with the Canadian government, with the Ministry of immigration; Ahmed Hussein, who
himself is a former refugee from Somalia. In May, the Canadian government
communicated very clearly in writing that they would expedite the screening of our
clients’ cases, aware that the situation for our clients was serious and urgent. In
July of this year, the Canadian government made a turnabout and said they would
assess the cases chronologically, which takes 52 months. So on one hand the Hong
Kong government is simply trying to fast- track and rush the screening process for
my clients in Hong Kong for their asylum and refugee claims—
to deport them. And in Hong Kong, there's an effective zero percent acceptance rate
of refugees in Hong Kong. Which is extraordinary, and the UN Committee
Against Torture has said that this is … has been very critical for the Hong Kong
government. So at this stage, these lawyers are pushing the Canadian government to
have these cases decided in favour of our clients, and to remind the Canadian
government that if the clients are removed from Hong Kong, because the Canadian
government fails to act in time, the Canadian refugee claims will extinguish.
Because the clients, once they return to their home soil, they have no more refugee
claims. Under the Refugee Convention, you must be outside of your home country.
Right, I'm gonna come to this last, because the clients need support. And they
need support for food, for rent, because the Hong Kong government is not providing
any of that. And we foresee that we we have a continued battle through to 2018.
But at the same time, other the clients; the clients will not be in Hong Kong by
the end of 2018. We, we know that as a fact. They're either gonna be in their
home countries, or hopefully they'll be in Canada. The one other thing I'd like to
mention is that when the Hong Kong police grabbed the witnesses to the Snowden, for
the Snowden refugees, Sri Lankan police— they took the cell phones from the
clients. From the re…, from the witnesses, and they gained access to the
data in there. And they did that unlawfully. So this is the environment in
Hong Kong. This is an environment where police have acted with impunity against
the most vulnerable. Even to this day, the Department of Justice in Hong Kong refuses
to believe that Mr. Snowden had ever met the Snowden refugees—despite compelling
evidence. And it's an extraordinary and bizarre situation in Hong Kong. But what
it is is, the government projecting its power, and using it against the most
vulnerable. I'm going to stop here, and what I would like to do now, is I'd like
to welcome my other client: Mr. Edward Snowden.
[Applause] Edward Snowden: So, we have a limited time.
Actually for the audio room—could you cut my my feed for the room for a minute
while I speak—thank you. So, everything that you've heard so far, is an indication
of the kind of things that hackers have known about long before anybody else—we
are familiar with the fact that governments abuse their power. We are
familiar with the fact, the idea, that institutions, and the processes that we're
told to rely on don't always work as promised. And the question is: Why is that?
What is a hacker? Why are you here? You know, first of all, I have to thank
you, everyone, for coming to this talk, because I know I had to be a long line.
And you're here to hear about the individual plight of these incredibly
brave people: Supun, Nadeeka, Ajit, and Vanessa and their children. Instead of,
one of a hundred other talks, which I'm sure given this timeslot are incredibly
compelling and nobody wanted to miss. But in this room, we have a thousand hackers
for human rights. And I would argue the reason for that is because you care. And
this is important, right? This is no small thing; this is not a platitude, this is
not to be cute, this is not lip service, right? Because caring is the prerequisite
of progress—I don't care how smart you are, I don't care how much talent you
have, I don't care how connected you are, what your resources are, who your friends
are, where you went to school. All of these capabilities are bottlenecked by a
single thing—and that is concern. That is how much you care.
And you're here. These families need our help. This is a problem that
needs to be solved, and I can think of no
better to solve this than you, hackers, right? Because it is that shared value
that we all have. Where we look at these things, this, this this common sentiment,
this tribal value that defines all of us. Regardless of how we feel about the
politics. Regardless, of you know, the one guy out there in the audience who's like,
“Oh, I'm not gonna clap for this guy, he's a Russian spy.” You know, we all know that
person. And that's okay, right? Because what is a hacker? One who doubts. That
weirdo in the third row is that guy. Just as the rest of us are. A hacker is one
skeptical of claims—that the system works as promised, or even design, rather
than how it operates, as it's observed, what we see. We take the risk every day of
our work, of being wrong—in order to be right. In order to do right. In order to
fix problems. In order to discover things people didn't know. Well, why, why did
people do that why risk wasting hours and euros and verifying some random API or
running the fuzzer for weeks, just to see what happens? And this is gonna sound like
the most arrogant statement you'll hear, you know, all week. But it's because we
know better: all of us have reasons for that doubt. That are different, but in each
one of us we share a lived experience that planted a seed in us that grew into that
skepticism. That we should trust the system. That we should rely upon the way
the world is, as it is, and accept that that's just the way things are. That what
was promised is good enough. And boy, ladies and gentlemen, what I say that this
year has proved the value of our skepticism. What you've heard so far about
the familes, what you've heard so far about the retaliation against Mr. Tibbo,
which I promise you, based on personal knowledge, goes far deeper than what he
has said. Because he's kind of a humble guy. But it is beyond
injustice. and it's travelling into inhumanity, right? So we look to the
other side: Why? Why is the Hong Kong government acting like this, right? Why
are these, you know, few people being dragged through coals when the government
could very easily just say, “Okay fine, you know, we know their names, they're in a
movie, we're just gonna let them pass, well, we'll give them asylum.” Even though
in Hong Kong, the asylum admittance rate is something less than 1%. In most
countries I think it's more than 30%, but in Hong Kong it's less than 1%.
Nobody gets asylum. And the reason why is because these people then become an
example—they show that there are things that are wrong, they show that the system
is broke, and they show that things can work better when people understand it.
When somebody shows the flaw, when these people become the proof of concept—
suddenly there's pressure for change, suddenly that caring begins.
And suddenly, progress seems realistic. And just as in many other countries,
immigration, unfortunately, is a politically contentious issue. Regardless
of whether these are, you know, economic migrants, or whether these are people who
are legitimately flaming … fleeing torture and violence, rape, and threats to life.
And this is why I think this is so important. This is why I think it's so
important, to talk about this. To be interested in this—even if you don't do
anything about it, although I absolutely hope that you will do something about it.
Is because doubt is the first form of dissent. We like to think of protest,
right? We like to think of, you know, people making arguments. Constructing
them, writing, and sharing the debate. And these things are important, but these all
grow from that initial impulse, that initial skepticism, that initial doubt,
that just makes you go, “this doesn't seem right!” Because if that doubt is powerful,
doubt is valuable, doubt is that motivator. But doubt makes enemies, right?
And these people who doubted the legitimacy of the Hong Kong government's
approaches to them: the threats, the coercion, the attempts at subversion
to make them go against their initial decision: that has made them enemies.
And now they face retaliation, and now they need our help. So what do we
do? You know, we are, ultimately, just people. We are technologists, we are
technicians. And we are a community of so many others. You know, this is a difficult
case for some people who have deeply conservative political values—I would
hope they are not the majority in the room. But I want you to put yourself, just
for a second, in the shoes of these people, these families, my friends, live
in desperate poverty. They did not have a toilet that you sat on—it was a hole in
the floor. The kitchen sink was the bathroom sink. The stove was a camp stove
in the bathroom. People rotated sleeping on the floor because there weren't enough
beds. These are not people living in glamorous circumstances. These are not
people exploiting this system, right. These are not people trying to get
something for nothing. These are people trying to make the most of what they have.
Trying to eke out an existence in a difficult, competitive society that is not
their own. In a place where the language is not their own. And trying to raise
children in, ultimately, hostile circumstance and despite that, despite the
precarious situation in which they found themselves, despite having nothing and
having no one but Mr. Tibbo to represent them. And hope that one day, they would be
able to stay and have right to actually just apply for a job—not even a
guarantee of work. Somebody showed up on their doorstep. And imagine that was you,
and it's the most wanted man in the world. And he needs help, right. Maybe he's the
worst person on earth, maybe he's the best; you don't know. All you know is he's
hunted. These families knew what that was like. They'd been there, they lived
through that. And because of that they helped me get off the X. They risked a
lot. And I think, you know, so many people say so negative things about refugees
today. They see them as the worst kind of people. But I know for my lived
experience, right, my seed of doubt, that there are cases that they're wrong.
And this is absolutely one of them—these are some of the best people that I've ever
met, who have nothing but were willing to risk everything for someone that they
didn't even know. Just because they knew what it was like to need shelter. And so I
ask you, you know, think about what you can do, in a small way. Maybe you can help
them, right. Maybe you can donate—we have a website fortherefugees.com—it's a
fundraise for the family. But it's more than that, right? Because this is not just
about what happens in this room, this is not just about this individual case. These
problems are going to persist. Other people are going to run into the same
challenges. And its going to be a question of, who do they turn to, when they don't
have a movie to advocate for them, right? And that's why I would say something that
frustrates me about what we have seen in the advance of technologies just in these
last few years, is this used to be, unfortunately, a very clubby community,
right? And it's broadened, we've got wider participation, and that's awesome. But
with that, we've also seen a commoditization of our work, of what we
do. We see people looking to land their job at the Google, the Facebook. And to do
that, they sand down the sharp edges of their own beliefs, of their own seeds,
of their own ideologies. We become more likely to agree, rather than more likely
to argue. And I think we need to think about what that means for the world when
we, and our occupation, our specialty in this moment of history—the atomic moment
of computer science. Our work has never been more important. You can't open a
newspaper without people talking about cybersecurity, right? Cyber, cyber, cyber.
Because they don't know you should just say computers; instead they want to invent
words, right? But the problem here is the world is relying upon us; at the same time,
we are being pressured to be apolitical. And ladies and gentlemen, I think that is
wrong, I think that is incorrect. I think we have some of the brightest minds
in our communities, in this room. And I think what you think, what you
believe, matters beyond what you can do behind the keyboard. And I think what you
do behind the keyboard should be an expression, an extension, of making that
real. Right, look around at the world: look at the fact that we're having to come
together in conferences, and we're having to hold largely off-topic conversations to
meet the basic needs of brave people. But can we make that system better? And can we
do that on a broader stage than what we have here, we're not even talking about
refugees—we're talking about the entire body of humanity. I think we can, and I
think we should. We've seen progress, we've seen where we have actually made
constructive advances here. You see in the United States there's always this constant
talk about encryption, government spying backdoors into it; the FBI is having to
beg on both knees corporations not to use secure communications. It was not so very
long ago, ladies and gentlemen, that that would have seemed like a joke. The
governments would have simply presumed that they could have banned this easily,
they could have made the rule, set the rules, and we would have to live by them.
Without even having a chance to consider whether they were right or wrong, simply
because it was their sovereign decision. But we are now a part of that sovereign:
this world is larger. Our ability to be involved in our societies, our
democracies, and more broadly across borders, our world is larger. And with
this role we need to be thinking about what we can do. Maybe you're not a lawyer,
right? Maybe you have no influence in Hong Kong; God knows I don't, right? Maybe we
can't guarantee the courts will be fair. Maybe we cannot guarantee that the police
are going to be accurate. Maybe we cannot guarantee that the government is going to
serve the people. But maybe we can ensure that we don't need them to. And that is a
revolutionary idea. But it's a basic idea, it's an old idea,
it's one that's as old as hacking itself.
We don't want to be told what to do. And that's not to say that all government is
the enemy that's, not to say that we shouldn't do anything at all. That doesn't
mean that, you know, all rules are bad. But all rules should be challenged, all
rules should be proven. All implementations should be tested. And that
goes beyond APIs, ladies and gentlemen. And I hope, based on this you will help
Ajit, Supun, Nadeeka, Vanessa and their kids. And I hope, ladies and gentlemen,
you will not stop there. Thank you very much.
[Applause] Edward Snowden: Just to be clear, I have
no audio, but I can see you. Thank you. [Applause]
Robert Tibbo: Thank you, thank you so much, Ed.
Edward Snowden: And thank you, thank you. I don't know if we have time for
questions: I can't hear real well. Robert, if you want to take them or anyone else.
Or if we're behind schedule—I know CCC is always tight—we can move on to the next …
Robert Tibbo: Well there's two things.
I think, I think probably, there should be at least one question for you tonight. But
the Snowden refugees are gonna … they're gonna come on screen right after
Ed answers the question. So you're gonna have an opportunity to meet all seven of
Ed Snowden, Snowden's guardians or guardian angels. So one question
Edward Snowden: And if I could ask the CCC technical team: if you could type this for
me, that would help, because I can't hear at all.
Question: Hi, so, thank you. So Russian President Putin has said multiple times
that you met with Russian officials in Hong Kong? At what point did that happen,
and, if it was during you staying with the refugees, how did that work?
Edward Snowden: I'm sorry, I couldn't hear the question but I think it was something
about the Russians, right? And so I'm glad somebody asked, because this gets into the
whole doubting thing, right? Of course we're gonna get the Russian question,
right? Well look, a lot of people are interested in this, and a lot of people
wonder, because there's all of these conspiracy theories out here. It's it's a
fabulous wonderful thing that we have this skepticism, but it should also be
reasonable, right? Whenever we look at argumentation, whenever we look at doubt,
there's this ancient rule. Which is, that which is asserted without evidence
must be dismissed without evidence. Because otherwise, we're wasting our time
We don't just want to be engaged in speculation. There was a whole book
written by some crazy guy that was this missing days theory, right? Where like
before I was even at the Mira, I was secretly sneaking around with the
Russians, and it simply didn't happen. They said I wasn't at the Mira hotel, I
had a, like, some handler or somebody like that in in Hong Kong. And I was staying
with them. But the funny thing is we actually had hotel receipts, right? So
this book comes out and we published them and then they're like, “Oh! But you know,
maybe we just got it wrong, maybe it was a little bit whatever.” But the reality is,
guys, look: what makes more sense, when we talk about doubt? The idea that a guy
who's making a hell of a lot of money without a high school degree in the United
States, working at the NSA, working at the CIA; in Hawaii with a, living with a
beautiful woman that he loves very much, that he's been together for years, is gonna
set his life on fire to go run off to Russia, right? Particularly when his argument is
primarily against surveillance. Does that make sense, okay? And then going beyond
this: if that's the case, right, and he is a Russian spy: why in the hell does he
go to Hong Kong, first, right? Why doesn't he just fly to Moscow, right? But setting
that aside, we got all these double games and these wheels within wheels where I
didn't even choose to be in Russia. I had a transit ticket that was just supposed to
be a layover for like 12 hours or something like that in Moscow, en-route to
Latin America. And this is publicly known! This isn't, like, speculation, this
isn't assertion. It's documented fact; you can still go on Twitter and find pictures
of the plane to Cuba that was packed full of journalists taking pictures of my empty
seat and Aeroflot leaked the ticket, right, where where I was in it
or whatever. But it just goes on and on. We got this continuing today, where I
just released a new app with the freedom of the press foundation and
the Guardian project. Maybe some of you guys have heard about it.
It's called Haven. It's an Android app, right,
It's completely open-source. It's free, it's not for pay, there's no profit motive
in this. And we had, like, some former CIA guys out there go into the meeting going,
“There's no way this isn't a Russian government backdoor!” First of all, guys,
it's open source. It's … the program's not that big, it's in Java. Just go look
at the code yourself. It's not there. But even, even if it were there, it could be
there or wherever, guess how many lines of code I wrote on Haven, guys. Zero, right?
I'm not a developer. I'm not trying to be. The person you want to thank is Nate
Freitas. Who is, by the way, an American. He's not a Russian, I don't think he's
even ever been to Russia. I don't even have access to the git repo, specifically
to avoid people being able to make these arguments. To try to undermine the
application. So even if I were a Russian spy, right? Even if this were some sneaky
trick, planned the long game to try to get into people's phones. How would that even
work, right? So just to answer the question formally I would say: thank you
for being doubtful, thank you for being skeptical, but at the same time, don't be
crazy. Thank you. [Applause]
Robert Tibbo: Alright the, the next group of people will be the Snowden refugees.
They're gonna come on in about a minute, and there are a few things I also wanted
to disclose to you and … help you understand that the Hong Kong government
has taken a view in all the cases I've done, that the Philippines in Sri Lanka
are safe countries that have rule of law and provide state protection. And that
couldn't be further from the truth. So very quickly, under the President
Duterte's, and I would call it an authoritarian regime, in the Philippines,
he's instituted martial law in Mindanao. He successfully, in December, had that
extended for a year, but without lawful basis. He broke off. He actually
ordered emergency … a state of emergency across the country earlier this year.
Over 10,000 people have lost their lives in the name of his drug war. Which
in fact, is just a façade for basically creating fear in the Philippines. And he's
expanded that war on drugs targeting politicians, journalists, and political
activists. And only a few months ago, he threatened the United Nations Special
Rapporteur on or extrajudicial killings and summary executions by telling her that
if he sees her he's going to slap her in the face. He's a self-confessed murderer.
He broke off negotiations, peace talks, with the New People's Army—and this is
the group that persecuted Vanessa. And here are my clients.
[Applause] Robert Tibbo: Vanessa, Supun, Nadeeka,
Ajit: can you hear everybody? Daughter: Hi!
Robert Tibbo: Alright, so what I'd like to do is, I'd like to open this up to Q&A. So
if you'd like … if you have any questions for my clients, they'd be more than happy
to to try to answer your questions. [Silence followed by laughter]
Robert Tibbo: Don't be afraid! All right, so. So Vanessa's from the Philippines, and
the other three adults are from Sri Lanka. And so we've been doing everything to keep
their cases alive in Hong Kong, and also advocating to the Canadian government to,
to act quickly, to act promptly. A couple things I'll mention about the Snowden
refugees is that I raised their asylum claims for the children under the United
Nations Convention on rights of the child. And the Hong Kong government had signed
that International Convention, but decided that they didn't have to follow it. They
said, because we didn't incorporate it into domestic legislation, these children
don't have the benefit on the UN Convention and rights to the child. And
refused to assess their asylum claims on that basis. So Hong Kong, they're without
a doubt, the richest jurisdiction in the world. This is how they view the treatment
of the vulnerable, but in particular, vulnerable children. Vanessa, is there
anything you'd like to say? Oh are there questions? Yes, please.
Question: Yes, I think the German government should be ash… the German
government should be ashamed that Edward Snowden cannot come here
as a political refugee. Would it be helpful if we pressure the German government
to give political refugee status to Edward Snowden's guardian angels?
If the Canadian government is not moving fast enough, maybe
we can get the German government to move fast enough?
[Applause] Robert Tibbo: Vanessa, Supun; the question
is: if Canada doesn't act, would you like it if the German government is
asked to act? To provide asylum to you and the other families.
[Silence} Robert Tibbo: Can you hear? Are you able
to hear us? I think we've lost the sound. Yes definitely, definitely.
[Applause] There are only seven Snowden refugees in
the world. Who did the extraordinary. And as you learned tonight, their families in
Sri Lanka did the extraordinary. To protect Edward Snowden. Because they knew
it was the right thing to do. And without without hesitation. There; it is
extraordinary that in this world today, that there's no room for seven refugees.
No room. These specific extraordinary people. And, it's just, it would be an
easy one step forward by the German government to offer them asylum. There's
another question, I think, from number seven.
Mic 7: Yeah hi—I just wanted to say thank you to the refugees for their
bravecy… their bravery. [Applause]
Mic 7: For our privacy. And also ask, given the difficulties of your situation
before you met this man: What compelled you to help him?
Robert Tibbo: Can you guys hear the question? Can you hear? It looks like
we've lost the sound again. There we go, it sounds working. All right, can you, can
you hear? Can you hear? Vanessa: Now we can hear you
Robert Tibbo: You can hear now right? Why did you help Mr. Snowden? Vanessa, why did
you all, why did you all help mr. Snowden? Vanessa: Because he needs help, and we
were able to help him. [Applause]
Robert Tibbo: And now after everything that's happened over the last five years,
would you do it again? Vanessa: Yes
[Applause] Mic 7: Thank you
Robert Tibbo: All right, we're gonna leave you, leave you for the evening, Vanessa,
Supun, Nadeeka, Ajit, Satum, Kiana. Thank you so much for showing up tonight.
[Applause] Robert Tibbo: I need to get one more slide
up. Herald: It's up, it's up
Robert Tibbo: Thank you. If you go to fortherefugees site, it's a new site
that's been launched as of today. And it has a variety of options if you'd like to
donate. And we ask you to help. These families need help. And the money goes to
them—it doesn't go to the lawyers, it doesn't go to administrators, it all goes
to the families 100%. And there's Bitcoin, credit card. Tap, there, there's different
ways you can get the cash to the families, yes. There can be telegraphic transfers,
and somebody here in Leipzig could could accept the cash and send it on to
fortherefugees in Montreal. And so I'll leave it at that, I think we're over time
Herald: Yeah, we're a little bit over time. Thank you very much, once again, great
talk [Applause]
[Music]