Edward Snowden, a computer expert and former CIA systems administrator, released confidential Government documents to the press about the existence of Government surveillance programmes. According to many legal experts and the US Government, his actions violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which identified the leak of State secrets as an act of treason. Yet, despite the fact that he broke the law, Snowden argued that he had a moral obligation to act. He gave a justification for his "whistle blowing" by stating that he had a duty "to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them." According to Snowden, the Government's violation of privacy had to be exposed regardless of legality since more substantive issues of social action and public morality were involved here. Many agreed with Snowden. Few argued that he broke the law and compromised national security, for which he should be held accountable. Do you agree that Snowden's actions were ethically justified even if legally prohibited? Why or why not? Make an argument by weighing the competing values in this case.

Model answer

Paper viewText view

2 pages3 pagesDetailedPDF

Exam length · 278wShort · 167wFull · 537w

Ghissu Editorial · Verified 4 Oct 2026 · 278 words

Q1.

Edward Snowden, a computer expert and former CIA systems administrator, released confidential Government documents to the press about the existence of Government surveillance programmes. According to many legal experts and the US Government, his actions violated the Espionage Act of 1917, which identified the leak of State secrets as an act of treason. Yet, despite the fact that he broke the law, Snowden argued that he had a moral obligation to act. He gave a justification for his "whistle blowing" by stating that he had a duty "to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them." According to Snowden, the Government's violation of privacy had to be exposed regardless of legality since more substantive issues of social action and public morality were involved here. Many agreed with Snowden. Few argued that he broke the law and compromised national security, for which he should be held accountable. Do you agree that Snowden's actions were ethically justified even if legally prohibited? Why or why not? Make an argument by weighing the competing values in this case.20

Introduction

Snowden's 2013 leak of the NSA's bulk collection of Americans' phone records pits the citizen's right to know against the State's duty of secrecy.

Competing Values in the Snowden Case

•

Privacy vs National Security

Both protect citizens, one from the State and one from external threats.

•

Conscience vs Rule of Law

Moral judgement clashes with the Espionage Act of 1917, under which he was charged.

Why the Disclosure Can Be Called Ethically Justified

•

A real wrong

In ACLU v Clapper (2015) [case] a US appeals court held bulk collection exceeded the Patriot Act, and the USA FREEDOM Act, 2015 ended it.

•

Failed channels

A secret court approved the programme, and whistleblower protections then excluded contractors.

•

Persons as ends

Kant's principle supports the citizen's right to know how the State watches him.

Why the Disclosure Falls Short Ethically

•

Indiscriminate scale

Releasing foreign-intelligence material fails Proportionality.

•

Evading accountability

Gandhi in 1922 and Ellsberg after the Pentagon Papers (1971) [case] faced trial; Snowden fled.

Weighing the Competing Values

Right to Know vs National Security. Venn diagram: Right to Know, National Security; overlap: Narrow disclosure, accept accountability

The motive passes the public-interest test; the manner fails it. India's Pegasus order, Manohar Lal Sharma (2021) [case], held that national security is no free pass.

Justification:

Rawls's theory of civil disobedience: lawbreaking is justified when public, conscientious and accepting of consequences.

Conclusion

I agree that exposing bulk surveillance was ethically justified though illegal, as Constitutional Morality puts liberty above an unlawful secret programme. The justification is partial: it covers the narrow truth, not the scale of the leak or the escape from accountability.

This model answer is indicative and the model can make mistakes; please verify key facts independently.

Question from the official UPSC Civil Services (Main) Examination 2018 paper. Answer written by Ghissu's engine and checked against our editorial standards. Found an error? Tell us and we correct it within 48 hours.