Australia’s parliament overwhelmingly voted to ask the US and UK governments to stop prosecuting WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, and a group of more than 35 US lawyers asked the US Department of Justice to file charges against Australian journalists. I wrote a letter asking for it to be withdrawn.
This comes ahead of a hearing on Assange’s possible final appeal to challenge his extradition from the UK to the US on charges of disclosing classified US military documents. Hearings will be held at London’s High Court on Tuesday and Wednesday.
If extradited to the United States after exhausting all legal appeals, Assange, 52, will Alexandria, Virginia; He could be sentenced to up to 175 years in a maximum-security prison in the United States.
The Australian Parliament motion, tabled by independent MP Andrew Wilkie, was passed by an 86-42 vote on Wednesday. Labor Prime Minister Anthony Albanese voted in favor of the motion, while most Conservative opposition coalition MPs voted in favor of it. I was against it.
UK High Court sets final appeal date for Julian Assange over US extradition
Australia’s parliament has overwhelmingly voted to ask the US and UK governments to halt the prosecution of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. (Getty Images)
The parliamentary motion stressed “the importance of the UK and US bringing this matter to a close so that Mr Assange can return to his family in Australia”.
The Australian publisher faces 17 charges under the Espionage Act for allegedly receiving, possessing and transmitting classified information to the public and one charge alleging conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. There is.
The charges stem from WikiLeaks’ 2010 release of leaked cables by U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning detailing war crimes committed by the U.S. government in Iraq, Afghanistan and Cuba’s Guantanamo Bay detention center. , initiated by the Trump administration’s Justice Department. The document also exposes cases of CIA torture and coercion.
WikiLeaks’ “collateral murder” video, which showed U.S. forces shooting civilians in Iraq, including two Reuters reporters, was also released 14 years ago.
Mr Wilkie told parliament ahead of the vote that the motion “sends a strong political signal to the UK and US governments”.
UN torture expert urges UK to halt extradition of Julian Assange to US over fears of torture and human rights violations
During the debate, Mr Wilkie urged fellow MPs to support the motion because “it’s time for us all to stand up” and “time is running out to save Julian Assange”.
Labor MP Josh Wilson told parliament that the same material that led to the accusations against Assange had been “published by the American press without legal repercussions”.
In 2022, editors and publishers of US and European news organizations who helped publish excerpts from more than 250,000 documents obtained by Assange in the Cablegate leak – The Guardian, The New York Times, Le Monde , Der Spiegel, El Pais – wrote an open letter He called on the US to drop the charges against Assange.
The Obama administration decided in 2013 not to prosecute Assange over WikiLeaks’ 2010 publication of confidential cables because it would have also had to prosecute journalists at major news organizations who published the same material. It’s called the New York Times problem. Former President Obama also commuted Manning’s 35-year sentence to seven years in January 2017 for violating the Espionage Act and other crimes, and Manning, who had been in prison since 2010, was released later that year.
However, the Justice Department under former President Donald Trump later moved to indict Assange under the Espionage Act, and the Biden administration continues to prosecute him.
Australian lawmaker pens letter asking UK government to halt extradition of Julian Assange to US due to health concerns
More than 35 U.S. attorneys have written a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice asking it to drop charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. (Getty Images)
Mr. Albanese has repeatedly said over the last year that the United States should suspend its extradition request and that it is time to end Mr. Assange’s case.
Last year, a bipartisan delegation of Australian lawmakers visited Washington, D.C., and met with U.S. officials, members of Congress and civil rights groups to demand that the charges against Assange be dropped.multiple bipartisan effort U.S. lawmakers who called for Assange’s release issued a similar statement last year.
Assange has been held in London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison since April 11, 2019, when he was expelled from the Ecuadorian embassy for breaching his bail conditions. He had applied for asylum at the embassy since 2012 to avoid being extradited to Sweden on charges of raping two women. Sweden has not provided any guarantees to protect him from extradition to the United States. The investigation into the sexual assault charges was ultimately closed.
Australia’s Attorney General Mark Dreyfus said the extradition case against Mr. Assange had been filed during a meeting with Attorney General Merrick Garland in Washington, D.C., last month.
“While this was a private discussion, the government’s position on Assange is very clear and remains unchanged,” Dreyfus said in a statement. “It’s time to put an end to this problem.”
In the United States, lawyers from various academic institutions across the country sent a letter to Mr. Garland urging the Department of Justice to halt efforts to extradite WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States and prosecute him on espionage charges. I strongly request that it be withdrawn.” Activities. “
“Our personal views on Assange and WikiLeaks vary, and we are not writing to defend them in the court of public opinion. However, when it comes to the courts, it is constitutional to prosecute Assange. We all agree that we are concerned about the impact on “We believe the Espionage Act charges against him pose an existential threat to the First Amendment,” the lawyers added in a letter dated Wednesday.
The letter cites numerous U.S. Supreme Court decisions that journalists can publish true and newsworthy information even if the source obtained the information illegally.
Lawyers also point out that the indictment against Assange accuses him of “conscription.”[ing] You “source” and “solicit” Confidential Material by maintaining a website indicating that you accept Confidential Material.
Bipartisan Congressional resolution calls on US officials to drop charges against Assange
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has voted in favor of a motion calling on the US and UK governments to halt the prosecution of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. (AAP image via Mick Tsikas/AP)
“Award-winning journalists around the world also regularly ‘recruit’ sources, talk to them, use encrypted or anonymous communication channels, receive and accept confidential information, and discuss it with their sources. We are asking questions and putting them out there,” they wrote. “It’s not a crime. It’s investigative journalism. As long as they don’t contribute to the illegality of their sources, their actions are entitled to the full protection of the First Amendment.”
The lawyers also argued that the fallout from Assange’s indictment could extend beyond the Espionage Act and national security journalism, saying the case could lead to “routine violations based on all sorts of vague laws and untested legal theories.” There is a possibility that such interviews could lead to prosecution,” and there are cases where lawsuits have already been filed. Prosecutors are “testing the outer limits of such theories in their cases against journalists.”
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
“The Department of Justice, under your watch, is committed to ensuring that reporting and reporters’ First Amendment rights are protected, even when stories contain classified information. ” the lawyers told Garland. “You also strengthened the Justice Department’s internal guidelines for incidents involving reporters. We applaud these efforts. But prosecuting Assange under the Espionage Act would negate all of these policies. It would be ruined and open the door for future attorneys general to bring similar felony charges against journalists.”
Until Assange, no publisher had been charged under the Espionage Act, but many press freedom groups argue that his prosecution sets a dangerous precedent aimed at criminalizing journalism. . U.S. prosecutors and Assange’s critics have argued that WikiLeaks’ release of classified material is putting the lives of U.S. allies at risk, but there is no evidence that anyone was put at risk by releasing the documents. There isn’t.
