Assange's defense affirms that his surrender to the US would violate the extradition treaty: "The crimes he is accused of are political"

The defense of the founder of WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, stated this Tuesday that his client cannot be handed over to the United States because “the crimes that he is accused of (that country) are of a political nature”, which would violate the current extradition treaty. between London and Washington. He also maintained that turning him over would be “an abuse of process” and a violation of his rights to a fair trial and freedom of expression.

Lawyer Edward Fitzgerald listed his objections in a hearing before that court, asking permission to present a complete appeal – in a new trial – on several aspects of the case that he had not previously appealed and also against the extradition order signed in 2022 by the then Home Secretary Priti Patel, whose legal basis he questions.

The British Prosecutor's Office, representing the US Justice Department, requests that authorization to appeal be denied and that he be handed over, arguing that the accused committed crimes by disseminating secret information from the Government of USA. The two judges of the Superior Court must determine, after the hearings this Tuesday and tomorrow, Wednesday, whether the arguments of Assange's defense justify a new appeal or if extradition can instead proceed.

CIA plot to kill him

The Australian's lawyers, who could not appear in person this Tuesday due to health problems, pointed out that the discovery of a CIA plot to kidnap or kill their client when he was taking refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London (between 2012 and 2019 ) demonstrates the political motivation of the case. “Extraditing Assange would mean handing him directly into the hands of the same people who conspired to murder him,” argued his legal team, who wants the judges to admit that plot as evidence.

The lawyers also accuse the US of violating the rights of the founder of WikiLeaks by charging him with unprecedented charges with unpredictable penalties and emphasize that it is “the first time in the history of the United States that an editor has been prosecuted for obtaining or publishing (rather than leak) state secrets”. Specifically, they have indicated that “he is being prosecuted for participating in the ordinary journalistic practice of obtaining and publishing classified information, information that is both true and of obvious and important public interest.”

They also warn that Washington recognized that it could request that Assange not be given the same rights as a US citizen under the First Amendment of its Constitution – which guarantees freedom of expression – since he is an Australian national, which, They say, it would prevent a fair trial.

The defense also maintains that the jury in a possible trial in the US could be biased since, due to the location of the court, it would be chosen from people personally or professionally related to US Government agencies. The lawyers also fear that the country's authorities could add charges 'after the fact' to their client, which would violate the principle of only allowing extradition for the crimes specified in the international arrest warrant.

Protests in front of the court

While the trial was taking place, several hundred people of different nationalities protested outside the High Court in London to demand Assange's freedom. Among the predominant white on black color of the posters where you could read “Free Julian Assange”, the Guy Fawkes masks (symbol of anti-system protests) and the orange color of the prisoner jumpsuits that some wore stood out. of the attendees. “They are using Assange as an example to silence the press,” said Richard, a retired worker who attended the demonstration.

Also present at the protests was his wife Stella, who assured that the trial is based on “a persecution for political reasons.”. He also said that “the United States is abusing its judicial system to harass, persecute and intimidate us all” and complained that at the beginning of the session he was not allowed access to the main room, but was placed in an adjoining room. , from which attendees could not hear anything due to sound failures. “If this is how we practice open justice, I don't have a lot of confidence in the judicial system here,” he protested.

Inside the court, the atmosphere is also quite “tense,” Miguel Urbán, an Anticapitalist deputy in the European Parliament who has met with the Australian on several occasions, told Efe.. “There can be no other result than the acquittal of Julian Assange, because this will be the acquittal of freedom of information and the press,” he claimed.

Snowden says London cannot extradite him

Edward Snowden, a former CIA analyst who has taken refuge in Russia since he revealed details of American spy programs in 2013, has not been slow to speak out on the matter.. Like Assange's defense, he also indicated that London lacks legal mechanisms to extradite him, since he is being charged with political crimes and the extradition treaty between both countries “explicitly prohibits” the handover of political prisoners.

“The scandalous thing about the 'trial' that has been going on for years in the United Kingdom to condemn Julian Assange to die in an American dungeon is that the victim of his 'crime' (journalism) is a State and not a person,” he wrote. Snowden on the social network X, formerly Twitter.

After initially being arrested in 2010 for a case instigated by Sweden and now archived, Assange was arrested again in April 2019 at the request of the United States, which accused him of 18 crimes of espionage and computer intrusion due to the revelations on his website.. This information, published in 2010 and 2011, exposed human rights violations committed by the United States in Iraq and Afghanistan.