Ethical and Legal Assessment of Edward Snowden's Actions and Impact

This essay examines the ethical and legal dimensions of Edward Snowden's actions, focusing on the conflicts of values and the harm and benefits resulting from his actions. The essay analyzes whether Snowden's actions were ethically justified, even if legally prohibited, and considers what the author would have done in Snowden's position. It explores how the author's position would change if Snowden's leaks led to loss of life and examines the circumstances under which whistleblowing would be considered ethical. The essay references scholarly articles and journals to support its arguments, providing a comprehensive analysis of the ethical and legal complexities surrounding Snowden's revelations and their impact on public interest and government accountability.

Reflection

Table of Contents
MAIN BODY...................................................................................................................................3
1 values conflicts in the case. Harm by snowden and benefits from his actions.........................3
2. Snowden's actions were ethically justified even if legally prohibited, why or why not. ........3
3. what I have done if I were on Snowden's position..................................................................3
4. change the position if Snowden's leak would lead to loss of life among CIA operatives.......3
5. in which circumstance whistle-blowing would be ethical.......................................................4
REFERENCES................................................................................................................................5

MAIN BODY
1 values conflicts in the case. Harm by Snowden and benefits from his actions.
I think legal values are violated by Snowden as he released confidential documents of
government. He leaked secrets of government and by this actions he has harmed government.
His image has destroyed in front of authority. His action benefits the public because public came
to know that what government is doing against them. I believe that ethical aspect is greater than
legal aspect and what is not in the favour of public should be communicated with public (da
Silva and Larentis, 2020). As government is elected by public, so they are taking wrong
decisions for them then public should be aware of that.
2. Snowden's actions were ethically justified even if legally prohibited, why or why not.
Edward Snowden's actions was fulfilling ethical practices because I think that he thought
of public before government. Although it was legally wrong to leak such confidential
information in public but if it is not in public welfare then public should aware of that. I think
that Edward very well know that in democracy it is the right of public to know government
decisions. In my opinion by leaking government data he has done crime but for the country he
has become hero who know his service. Utilitarianism conveys that right action are those which
brings joy and here public are happy with the action of Snowden.
3. what I have done if I were on Snowden's position.
If I was on Snowden's position I would have done same as what he did. I believe that
serving public is the best thing of the job. As public servant you should not hide important
information from them. As government is elected by public, so they should always think about
public first. I believe that ethics are more important over legal aspect (Harfield, 2021). As people
are saying this as a crime but I believe that if the crime is in the favour of public then I won't
consider this a crime. Consequential theory says that moral value is judged through situation.

4. change the position if Snowden's leak would lead to loss of life among CIA operatives.
I will definitely not have taken decision to leak information if earlier I would come to
know that the decision of mine leaking confidential information can be loss to life of CIA
operatives. As I believe that life comes first before anything. If the decision to leak information
saves life then I would definitely leak the information because I think that public should know
decisions taken by higher authority. As above said that life of the individual is more important
than anything but i also believe that government leaders are elected by the public so public
should aware that what actions they are taking.
5. in which circumstance whistle-blowing would be ethical.
It saves life of people and give well-being to them then I think that whistle-blowing is
ethically ideal. I believe that nothing is more important over people's life. Ethics should consider
before legal aspect. It should be ethically prohibited if due to the action. life of people go in
danger (Riaz and et.al., 2020). As sometimes when confidential information gets leaked then it
can affect national security and when it comes to security of citizen then ethical prohibition is
valid. People life plays vital role and it should be important for every government. Ethics are
important and it is said that ethics are more important than the legal system.

REFERENCES
Books and Journals
da Silva, E.R. and Larentis, F., 2020. Storytelling from experience to reflection: ERSML cycle of
organizational learning. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
pp.1-24.
Harfield, C., 2021. Was Snowden virtuous?. Ethics and Information Technology, pp.1-11.
Riaz, S. and et.al., 2020. Reflection spectra of thick accretion discs. Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society. 491(1). pp.417-426.