most controversy has taken place. The most trenchant proof of this is the fact that relatively little has ever been written against the right, and indeed necessity, to classify military or diplomatic information while volumes have been filled with argument for the right to full access to information about "the public's business". The basic difficulty, however, lies in defining the scope of the latter category.

While document classification as a form of combined censorship and information restriction has been a part of our national policy from the War of the Revolution, formal and pervasive procedures for document classification in the current sense are a comparatively recent development. Prior to World War II, in peacetime there were few formal restrictions on information availability; the major exceptions were the traditional restraints in the diplomatic and military fields. In others areas, information restrictions were based for the most part upon individual judgment, as situations arose. The advent of World War I brought the first organized approach to document classification as a means of general restriction on public access to information. Censorship policies for control of published information commenced on March 24, 1917, with the promulgation of regulations by the State, War, and Navy Departments. Newspapers were asked to adhere voluntarily. One of the regulations requested that "no information, reports, or rumors, attributing a policy to the government in any international situation, not authorized by the President or a member of the cabinet, be published without first consulting the Department of State." 2

On April 13, 1917, by Executive Order 2594, President Wilson created the Committee on Public Information, named George Creel as chairman, and World War I censorship formally got under way. Creel thought that censorship as practiced at that time was unworkable. He described the whole effort as of a piece with "the hysterical ‘shush-shushing' that warned against unguarded speech, just as though every citizen possessed some important military secret." He said, at the end of the War, that "virtually everything we asked the press not to print was seen or known by thousands.” Creel believed the answer to be "secrecy at the source" through action by the military departments without depending upon press judgment.

World War II

In World War II, a much more efficient and effective system of information control was employed. It was a system that profited by the mistakes of World War I. It separated propaganda and censorship and, in effect, supported by voluntary agreement the withholding of information which the Armed Forces thought dangerous to disclose. It was, in reality, a system for making effec

'James Russell Wiggins, Freedom or Secrecy, Oxford University Press, New York, 1956, p. 95-96.

tive the theory of censorship at the sources of information that Creel had talked about at the end of World War I.

The first formal effort to withhold information in World War II came on December 31, 1940, when Secretary of Navy Frank Knox asked radio, news, and picture editors to avoid any mention of (1) Actual or intended movements of vessels or aircraft of the United States Navy, units of naval enlisted personnel or divisions of mobilized reserves, or troop movements of the United States Marine Corps; (2) New United States Navy ships or aircraft; (3) United States Navy construction projects ashore.3

During 1941 as America stepped up defense production and planning, information control tightened up. In September, the War and Navy Departments disclosed they were making plans for censorship of all outgoing communications. When the United States declared war, on December 8, J. Edgar Hoover was made temporary coordinator of all news and communications censorship. The President at this time appealed to press and radio to refrain from the publication of unconfirmed reports. Various Federal agencies took steps to curtail their information. The Weather Bureau, for example, began to restrict its reports.

When the first code of wartime practices for newspapers, magazines, and other periodicals was issued on January 15, 1942, wartime censorship was formally launched. The code was revised each 6 months thereafter. It described categories of news that were not to be published without appropriate authority, listing in 17 different clauses the information that required authorization before publication. The significant words in the operation of this wartime information code were "appropriate authority". The Office of Censorship did not undertake to suppress information that "appropriate authority" officially gave out. The Office of Censorship was terminated by Executive Order 9631, effective November 15, 1945.

By Executive Order 9182 of June 13, 1942, the Office of War Information (OWI) was established within the Office for Emergency Management (OEM). The OWI consolidated into one agency all foreign and domestic war information functions of the Government. This office combined the functions of several agencies dealing with various aspects of information availability: the Office of Facts and Figures, the Office of Government Reports, the Division of Information in OEM and the foreign information activities of the Office of the Coordinator of Information. The purpose of OWI was to "provide an intelligent understanding . . . of the status and progress of the war effort. . . policies, activities, and aims of the Government". The Office of War Information was abolished by Executive Order 9608 of August 31, 1945. Some of its functions were liquidated, while others were transferred to the Bureau of the Budget and the Department of State.5

3 Ibid.

U. S. Government Organization Manual, 1956-57, General Services Administration, U. S. Government Printing Office, 1956, pp. 669–670.

Ibid.

The Program Today

Following the end of hostilitites in World War II, the Security Advisory Board, which had functioned in a supervisory capacity in this field, as a part of the Office of War Information, survived the Office of War Information and continued to function as a part of the State-War-Navy Coordinating Committee later the State-Army-Navy-Air Force Coordinating Committee. As part of Executive Order 9835, on March 21, 1947, the Security Advisory Board was directed to draft rules for the handling and transmission of documents and information which should not be publicly disclosed. The Security Advisory Board completed a preliminary draft of such minimum standards, but these rules had not been issued when the Security Advisory Board and its parent coordinating committee went out of existence."

Cognizance of this unresolved problem was taken by the National Security Council in 1948, and the problem was subsequently transmitted to the Interdepartmental Committee on Internal Security (ICIS), which drafted new regulations establishing minimum standards for the handling and transmission of classified information in executive departments and agencies. These minimum standards were issued as Executive Order 10290 by President Truman on September 24, 1951.

When he took office in January 1953, President Eisenhower took notice of the widespread criticism directed at Executive Order 10290 by the press and public, and referred Executive Order 10290 to the Attorney General for recision or revision as deemed necessary. The Attorney General on June 15, 1953, wrote the President, detailing four objections from the standpoint of sound public policy with respect to Executive Order 10290 and its regulations. He recommended recision of that Executive order and the issuance of a new order which would protect every requirement of national safety and, at the same time, honor the basic tenets of freedom of information."

The new Executive order was circulated in executive departments and agencies for comment and, after minor revisions, was signed by the President on November 6, 1953, as Executive Order 10501, effective December 15, 1953. This order is the present legal basis for classification. Its provisions will be discussed in detail later on, but briefly speaking, it differed from Executive Order 10290 in the following major respects: (1) It withdrew authority to classify information from 28 agencies of the Government; (2) in 17 other agencies it limited authority to classify to the agency head, without power to delegate; (3) it sharply limited the authority to classify only if required in the interest of the national defense of the United States; (4) it completely eliminated the restricted classification, one of the most controversial categories of classified information; (5) it explicitly defined

Hearings before a subcommittee on reorganization of the Committee on Government Operations, United States Senate 84th Cong., 1st sess., on S. J. Res. 21, A Joint Resolution To Establish a Commission on Government Security, March 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18, 1955. Testimony of William F. Tompkins, asst. attorney general.

Ibid., p. 30.

for the first time the three remaining categories of classified informationtop secret, secret, and confidential, in order to prevent indiscriminate use of the power to classify when specific interests of the national defense did not so require; (6) it provided for continuous review of classified material for the purpose of declassifying or downgrading the classification whenever national defense considerations permit; and (7) it made more definite and certain the procedures for handling classified information, so that employees would be more alert to the dangers of unauthorized disclosure.

Executive Order 10501, after defining the types of national defense information which may be classified in one of the three categories, sets forth minimum rules for the labeling of such information, for its dissemination, transmission, handling, storage, and disposition, and for review with a view to downgrading or declassification. It fixes upon the head of the agency the responsibility for protection of classified information, as well as for conformity to the regulations with respect to erroneous classifications, declassification and downgrading. Additionally, it limits access to such information to trustworthy personnel, and restricts such access and disclosure to those having a need to know the information.

Executive Order 10501 makes provision for the designation by the President of a member of his staff to receive, consider, and take action upon suggestions or complaints from nongovernmental sources relating to the operation of the order. It further provides that the National Security Council shall conduct a continuing review of the implementation of the order to insure that classified defense information is properly safeguarded in conformity with the provision of the order. This continuing review function has been assigned by the Council to the Interdepartmental Committee on Internal Security, discussed above.

Despite the declared purpose of Executive Order 10501, to recognize that . . . It is essential that the citizens of the United States be informed concerning the activities of their government . . ." and the need that certain official information affecting the national defense be protected uniformly against unauthorized disclosure. . ." the Order has been subjected to continuous and sharp attack. These attacks have been led for the most part by leaders in the press and other information media as well as by numerous individuals in the legal field, and the world of science and scientific research.

In recognition of these attacks during the 84th Congress, the Special Subcommittee on Government Information of the House Committee on Government Operations held lengthy hearings under Congressman Moss to examine these complaints. These hearings and studies were the first major congressional effort to examine the document classification program.

Several agencies improved their information practices when the subcommittee was able to bring to the attention of the proper authorities complaints it had received from the press or the public. Following are some of the

important developments, resulting from subcommittee hearings which have helped clear the avenues of access to Federal Government information: 1. The Department of Commerce, following a subcommittee hearing and letters from the subcommittees to the Department and the National Security Council, made public a previously classified section of the National Security Council document establishing the Office of Strategic Information and also made public the major portion of three previously classified reports on the progress of the OSI. 2. The Defense Department, following contacts with the subcommittee, announced at a subcommittee hearing the establishment of a panel to review declassification of historical documents and to set up firm guidelines to speed up declassification.

3. The Defense Department, following subcommittee hearings on the flow of scientific and technical information, announced a proposal to expedite the separation of basic information for distribution within the scientific community from scientific information available to military weapons.8

The subcommittee is continuing to conduct hearings during the 85th Congress on the information policies and practices of the Department of Defense.

LEGAL BASIS

Authority for the Program

As previously noted, the current legal authority for the document classification program is Executive Order 10501, which became effective December 15, 1953, and revoked Executive Order 10290.9

Executive Order 10501 is entitled "Safeguarding Official Information in the Interests of the Defense of the United States." In summary, it establishes the classification categories of "confidential," "secret," and "top secret." It is designed to regulate the day-by-day handling of national security information within the various executive agencies and departments by prescribing uniform procedures governing the classification, transmission, dissemination, custody, and disposal of such information. In addition, there is provision for review of the entire classification program to insure adequate protection of the national security as well as to insure that no information is withheld thereunder which the people of the United States have a right to know.

8 Availability of Information From Federal Departments and Agencies, Twenty-fifth intermediate report (House Report 2947), Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives, 84th Cong., 2d sess., July 27, 1986, pp. 89–81.

18 F. R. 7049.