SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"The High Court's decision is a rare piece of positive news for Julian Assange and all defenders of press freedom," one Amnesty expert said.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange may appeal an extradition order to the U.S., the U.K. High Court ruled on Monday.
The 52-year-old Assange faces 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse due to WikiLeaks' publication of classified U.S. documents nearly 15 years ago. He has spent the last five years fighting extradition in London's high-security Belmarsh Prison.
"The High Court's decision is a rare piece of positive news for Julian Assange and all defenders of press freedom," Amnesty International legal adviser Simon Crowther said in response to the decision. "The High Court has rightly concluded that—if extradited to the USA, Assange will be at risk of serious abuse, including prolonged solitary confinement, which would violate the prohibition on torture or other ill-treatment."
"If the Biden administration cares about press freedom, it must drop the Assange case immediately."
The charges against Assange stem from WikiLeaks publications that revealed U.S. and U.K. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. U.S. prosecutors argue that Assange persuaded and facilitated U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in stealing classified documents that contained proof of these crimes, while Assange's lawyers maintain that he acted as a journalist and should be protected as one.
"Under the legal theory the government relies on in the indictment, any journalist could be convicted of violating the Espionage Act for obtaining or receiving national defense information from a source, communicating with a source to encourage them to provide national defense information, or publishing national defense information—acts journalists engage in every day," the Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) warned in a statement.
In March, the U.K.'s High Court delayed Assange's extradition until the Biden administration could provide certain assurances, including that Assange would have protection under the First Amendment and that he would not face the death penalty. The court gave the administration three weeks to respond, and set a May 20 hearing date to determine if the assurances were sufficient or if Asange could appeal his extradition.
During Monday's hearing, Assange's lawyers argued that the administration's assurances were "blatantly inadequate," according toThe Associated Press.
While Assange's legal team accepted the assurance that the U.S. would not seek the death penalty as an "unambiguous executive promise," they did did not accept the U.S. response to whether or not Assange would be granted the same First Amendment rights as a U.S. citizen.
As The Guardian reported:
Edward Fitzgerald KC, representing Assange, said problems surrounding the assurances by the U.S. were "multifold" and they did not rule out the possibility of a U.S. court ruling that the WikiLeaks founder, as a foreigner, was not entitled to First Amendment rights.
The assurance was not that Assange could "rely" on First Amendment rights but "merely that he can seek to raise" them, Fitzgerald said.
In response to these arguments, High Court Judges Victoria Sharp and Jeremy Johnson determined that Assange could appeal his extradition.
WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson said the ruling was "finally a glimmer of hope" for Assange.
The WikiLeaks founder's wife, Stella Assange, said the U.S. had put "lipstick on a pig—but the judges did not buy it," according to AP.
"As a family we are relieved but how long can this go on?" she asked. "This case is shameful and it is taking an enormous toll on Julian."
FPF deputy director of advocacy Caitlin Vogus said the group welcomed the decision and urged the court to deny the extradition request.
"But better yet, the Biden administration can and should end this case now," Vogus continued.
"If [U.S. President Joe] Biden continues to pursue the Assange prosecution, he risks creating a precedent that could be used against any reporter who exposes government secrets, even if they reveal official crimes," Vogus added. "If the Biden administration cares about press freedom, it must drop the Assange case immediately."
Amnesty's Crowther agreed: "The USA's ongoing attempt to prosecute Assange puts media freedom at risk worldwide. It ridicules the USA's obligations under international law, and their stated commitment to freedom of expression. In trying to imprison him, the U.S. is sending the unambiguous message that they have no respect for freedom of expression, and that they wish to send a warning to journalists and publishers everywhere: that they too could be targeted, for receiving and publishing classified material—even if doing so is in the public interest."
"As the fight continues in the U.K. courts, we call on the USA to finally put an end to this shameful saga, by dropping all the charges against Assange," Crowther continued. "This would bring the process in the U.K. to an immediate halt, and Julian Assange will be freed. Assange has already spent five years in prison in the U.K., much of which has been arbitrary."
Assange, whose has suffered from health problems, has been confined in one form or another since 2010. For nearly seven years before 2019, he sheltered in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
"If Biden lets this case proceed," said one advocate, "future administrations will surely use the precedent of the Assange prosecution... to go after journalists they don't like."
Press freedom groups on Thursday said that following the United Kingdom High Court's rejection of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's appeal against his extradition order to the United States, U.S. President Joe Biden has a choice to make: continue with the federal case against the publisher or stand on the side of journalists everywhere and drop the charges against Assange.
High Court Judge Jonathan Swift on Tuesday handed down the decision rejecting Assange's appeal of an extradition order that was signed a year ago by U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel, leaving Assange's legal team with less than a week to submit another appeal to a panel of two judges.
The judges could convene a public hearing on the case of Assange, who has been charged in the U.S. with violating the 1917 Espionage Act for publishing classified military documents that revealed the United States' alleged war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Press freedom and human rights groups have maintained that Assange has been prosecuted for publicizing government information just as newspapers routinely do and have demanded that the White House drop the charges.
"The idea of Assange or anyone being tried in a U.S. court for obtaining and publishing confidential documents the same way investigative reporters do every day should be terrifying to all Americans," said Seth Stern, director of advocacy for Freedom of the Press Foundation. "It's time for Biden to drop this case and show the world he's serious about press freedom."
\u201cFPF's statement on the rejection of Julian Assange\u2019s extradition appeal.\nhttps://t.co/sbPqRfVH8j\u201d— Freedom of the Press (@Freedom of the Press) 1686247315
The Daily Mail reported Thursday that the U.K. Home Office is currently preparing paperwork to rapidly extradite Assange and that he could be sent to the U.S. "in the next few weeks."
Human rights lawyer Stella Assange, who is married to the WikiLeaks publisher, said Assange will "make a renewed application for appeal to the High Court."
"We remain optimistic that we will prevail and that Julian will not be extradited to the United States where he faces charges that could result in him spending the rest of his life in a maximum security prison for publishing true information that revealed war crimes committed by the U.S. government," she said.
Assange's extradition was originally blocked in 2021 when a Westminster Magistrate Court judge ruled that he should not be sent to the U.S. because of the risk that being held in an American maximum security prison would pose to Assange's mental health.
The High Court overturned that ruling after the U.S. claimed Assange would not be held in highly restrictive prison conditions.
Christophe Deloire, secretary-general of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), denounced the continued prosecution of Assange as "judicial harassment" and "an attack on global media freedom."
\u201cPresident @JoeBiden, it is now more urgent than ever to put an end to the judicial harassment of Julian Assange and bring the case against him to a close once and for all. Pursuing his extradition and prosecution\u00a0is an attack on global media freedom. It's time to #FreeAssange!\u2026\u201d— Christophe Deloire (@Christophe Deloire) 1686239616
Along with the possibility of a ruling by the High Court in Assange's favor, the European Court of Human Rights could block the extradition following the journalist's appeal to the court last year.
Rebecca Vincent, director of campaigns for RSF, called on Biden to take action instead of leaving it up to British and European judges, in order to end a case that could "land Julian Assange in prison for the rest of his life and permanently impact the climate for journalism around the world."
"The historical weight of what happens next cannot be overstated," said Vincent. "It is time to put a stop to this relentless targeting of Assange and act instead to protect journalism and press freedom. Our call on President Biden is now more urgent than ever: Drop these charges, close the case against Assange, and allow for his release without further delay."