The Assange extradition case has been kicked further down the
road.
The appeals court at the High Court here in London
adjourned its due decision on Tuesday.
It has sought 3 assurances from the US government before
the case could proceed further.
The first of these is an assurance from the US
that
Assange would have the right and the claim in the
US to a defense under the First Amendment of the
US Constitution.
That of course is the amendment that guarantees free speech.
The 2nd is that he will not be discriminated against
on grounds that he is an Australian national,
and 3rd that the death penalty would not apply.
On the 3rd assurances have been given by the US
already.
That is not matter. That really is material to the
debate and the dispute here.
On the second, again, assurances are very likely from the
US that he will not be discriminated against because he
is an Australian.
It is the first of those issues on the 1st
Amendment.
That is the tricky one that really goes to the
heart of the case.
Whether this was an exercise of free speech as a
journalist and as a citizen,
or whether he, as the US Government alleges,
compromise US security and US security personnel and personnel of
its allies through the leaks,
particularly those leaks that related to defense matters.
It is over these three that the US government is
now due to give a response over the next three
weeks.
The next hearing has been set for May the 20th.
If the US does not give these guarantees,
then the case would be sent to a Court of
Appeal for a full hearing before a further appeals court.
That will then take a call.
And it is likely that that decision could support Assange,
because the argument clearly would be that the assurances sought
have not come in.
But if the assurances do come in,
and this is before the next hearing in the case,
then the case still will be heard,
Assange is argument still will be heard at the next
hearing,
and the court will then take a call whether to
order extradition or not.
And if it does order,
extradition, the appeal or that Assange can further invoke would
be to the European Court of Human Rights,
which is not very likely to grant such an appeal,
going by its past practices and going by its past
judgments.
So short wait ahead now over a decision on Assange
after a very long wait.
He has been in prison now,
well, for the last more than five years,
but really in detention, in virtual prison,
or in effect in prison for much longer.
He was holed up at the Ecuador embassy for more
than seven years.
He had sought A refuge there and political asylum there
to word of a
demand from Sweden for his extradition in a rape case.
That case was later dropped on the grounds that it
had run out of time
on his exit from the Ecuador embassy.
In April 2019, he was arrested and sent to Belmarsh
Prison on grounds of breaking bail conditions,
and since then this matter has proceeded in the courts
here.
In January of 2021, a court blocked his extradition.
It upheld that the US government has a fair case
against him.
It upheld that case on merit,
so to speak, but blocked extradition of the grounds that
his move to the US would present an oppressive risk
that he might commit suicide.
That decision was reversed a year later and extradition was
ordered after guarantees from the US about his safety.
Now the court has demanded yet more guarantees from the
US.
But while this proceeds in court,
a parallel track has been activated to come to some
sort of negotiated settlement that perhaps he could be sent
to Australia to serve time there.
That is still being negotiated.
The delay here does buy time for those negotiations.
So there are really 2 tracks to watch out for.
First, the case here, the legal track.
Second, whether a settlement can be reached.
And these are the 2 tracks on which a decision
is likely.
Which comes first? What the decision is,
we should now know fairly soon.
Today's decision is astounding.
The courts recognize that Julian
is exposed to a flagrant denial of his
freedom of expression rights, that he is being discriminated against
on the basis of his nationality in Australian,
and that he remains exposed to the death penalty.
And yet, what the courts have done have been to
invite a political intervention from the United States,
to send a letter saying it's all OK.
I find this astounding.
Five years into this case,
the United States has managed to show the court that
their case remains an attack on press freedom,
an attack on Julian's life.
What the courts
haven't agreed to look at
is the evidence that the United States has plotted
to assassinate Julian, to kidnap him.
Because if it acknowledges that,
then of course
he can't be sent to the United States.
Julian is a political prisoner.
He is a journalist and he is being persecuted because
he exposed
the true cost of war in human lives.
This case is a retribution.
It is a signal to all of you
that if you expose
the interests that are driving war,
they will come after you,
they will put you in prison and they will try
to kill you.
Julian is just a few minutes a few days away
from the 5th anniversary of his arrest and imprisonment in
Belmarsh Prison.
He has been in Belmarsh for five years
without conviction, and the charges against him are
to punish him for publishing the truth,
for publishing evidence of the war crimes committed by the
country that is trying to extradite him.
Now the UK courts have invited the United States to
issue assurances.
The Biden administration should not issue assurances.
They should drop this shameful case that should never have
been brought.
Julian should never have been imprisoned for a single day.
This is a shame on every democracy.
Julian is a political prisoner.
He is a publisher and he is being published for
expressing
his political opinion, for expressing
freedom of the press in its purest form,
Free Julian. I ask everyone to rally behind him and
call for his freedom,
Call for the Brighton administration to
drop the case
and support House Resolution 934 before the US Congress to
drop this case.
Thank you.