If Julian Assange is extradited it will have far reaching human rights implications, setting a chilling precedent for the protection of those who publish leaked or classified information that is in the public interest
The last time I saw Julian Assange he looked tired and wan.
Dressed neatly in casual business attire, the Wikileaks founder was sitting in a glass-enclosed dock, at the back of a courtroom adjoining Belmarsh high security prison in London, flanked by two prison officers.
I had travelled from the US to observe the hearing. He had travelled via tunnel from his cell to the courtroom.
“Sitting 20 feet away from Julian Assange, I was struck by how much of a shadow of his former self he had become”.
Today, Julian Assange will be in court again, for the resumption of proceedings that will ultimately decide on the Trump administration’s request for his extradition to the US.
But it is not just Julian Assange that will be in the dock. Beside him will sit the fundamental tenets of media freedom that underpin the rights to freedom of expression and the public’s right to access to information. Silence this one man, and the US and its accomplices will gag others, spreading fear of persecution and prosecution over a global media community already under assault in the US and in many other countries worldwide.
The stakes really are that high. If the UK extradites Assange, he would face prosecution in the USA on espionage charges that could send him to prison for decades – possibly in a facility reserved for the highest security detainees and subjected to the strictest of daily regimes, including prolonged solitary confinement. All for doing something news editors do the world over – publishing public interest information provided by sources .
Indeed, President Donald Trump has called Wikileaks “disgraceful” and said that its actions in publishing classified information should carry the death penalty
The chilling effect on other publishers, investigative journalists and any person who would dare to facilitate the publication of classified information of government wrongdoing would be immediate and severe. And the US would boldly go beyond its own borders with a long arm to reach non-citizens, like Assange, who is Australian.
“You don’t need to be an expert in extradition law to understand that the charges against Assange are politically-motivated”.
The US government’s relentless pursuit of Assange - and the UK’s willing participation in his hunt and capture - has now landed him in a prison typically reserved for seasoned criminals. It has diminished him both physically and emotionally – often to the point of disorientation. Breaking him by isolating Assange from family, friends and his legal team, seems part and parcel of the US’s strategy – and it seems to be working.
You don’t need to know the vagaries of extradition law to understand that the charges against Assange are not only classic “political offences” and thus barred under extradition law, but more crucially, the charges are politically-motivated.
The 17 charges levelled by the US under the 1918 Espionage Act could bring 175 years in prison; add a conviction on the single computer fraud charge (said to complement the Espionage Act by dragging it into the computer era), and you get another gratuitous five years. Assange is the only publisher ever to bear the brunt of such espionage charges.
There is no doubt that the charges are politically-motivated under this US administration, which has all but convicted Assange in the public arena. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has claimed that Wikileaks is a “hostile intelligence service” whose activities must be “mitigated and managed.” The flagrantly unfair prosecution of Assange is an example of how far the US will go to “manage” the flow of information about government wrongdoing and thus undermine the public’s right to know.
Assange was on Barack Obama’s radar, too, but the Obama administration declined to prosecute Assange. Current US Attorney General William Barr, however, has turned out not one, but two indictments since 2019, the latest at the end of June. That second indictment was a surprise not only to Assange’s defence team, but to the Crown lawyer and the judge who were also taken unawares by the new indictment.
Earlier this year, sitting 20 feet away from Julian Assange, I was struck by how much of a shadow of his former self he had become. He did spontaneously stand up several times during that week of hearings to address the judge. He told her he was confused. He told her he could not properly hear the proceedings. He said that barriers in the prison and in court meant that he had not been able to consult with his lawyers. He was not technically permitted to address the judge directly, but he did repeatedly, flashes of the aggressive tactics used in the past to advocate for himself and the principles he has espoused.
“Publishing such information is a cornerstone of media freedom and the public's right to access information. It must be protected, not criminalized”.
If Julian Assange is extradited it will have far reaching human rights implications, setting a chilling precedent for the protection of those who publish leaked or classified information that is in the public interest.
Publishing such information is a cornerstone of media freedom and the public's right to access information. It must be protected, not criminalized.
Julia Hall is Amnesty International's expert on human rights in Europe
Tags: AMERICAS, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA, UNITED KINGDOM, CENSORSHIP AND FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION, ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS, DETENTION, TORTURE AND OTHER ILL-TREATMENT, HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS AND ACTIVISTS.
Syria: Government forces must lift siege on civilians
Davos World Economic Forum: “The stakes are too high for more empty gestures”
Europe and Asia: Lack of protection against domestic violence exacerbated
Qatar: Labour Minister’s dismissal of compensation campaign "disappointing"
Greece: Must be held to account after austerity measures violate right to health