The U.K. High Court in London gave U.S. officials three weeks to provide the assurances and said Assange would be able to appeal his extradition if those promises were not forthcoming. A decision on whether Assange will be granted a full appeal hearing has been pushed back to May 20, provided the United States grants the assurances. Assange is expected to remain for now in London’s Belmarsh prison, where he has been held since 2019.
Legal experts expressed doubt that the United States would have much trouble providing the necessary assurances of not using the death penalty — which isn’t even merited for the charges — and ensuring free speech protections.
Speaking to reporters outside of the High Court, Stella Assange, Julian’s wife, called the decision “astounding.”
“What the courts have done is to invite a political intervention from the United States, to send a letter saying, ‘It’s all okay,’” she said. “The Biden administration should not issue assurances; they should drop this shameful case that should never have been brought.”
An indictment filed in Virginia accuses Assange, 52, of helping former Army private Chelsea Manning hack into U.S. systems and obtaining thousands of pages of classified military records and diplomatic cables about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in 2010. Prosecutors say Assange put lives at risk by publishing the documents, which included unredacted names of sources and other sensitive military details, as part of a mass exposé on WikiLeaks.
Assange’s supporters and several leading news organizations say he was a journalist publishing damning information about U.S. actions abroad and that his extradition and prosecution would set a legal precedent undermining the First Amendment.
The long-stalled case against Assange could begin to move quickly if the extradition is granted by the British courts. But in that event, Assange would then have a final opportunity to appeal his extradition to the European Court of Human Rights, based in Strasbourg, France.
The WikiLeaks founder would face a maximum sentence of decades in prison if convicted of all charges. The 18-count indictment does not include allegations that Assange published Democratic officials’ emails that were hacked as part of a Russian campaign to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election.
Nick Vamos, a London-based lawyer who previously oversaw extraditions at Britain’s lead prosecutorial agency, noted that Assange’s main arguments — that his prosecution was politically motivated and an assault on journalism — were dismissed.
The High Court made clear that Assange “was not being prosecuted for journalism or for exposing grave state crimes, but for hacking and then publishing the names of sources who were put in serious danger,” he said.
Assange’s marathon battle against extradition “has entered the final stretch, but hasn’t quite reached the finishing line,” he said. The U.S. government would “have little difficulty in providing these assurances and Mr. Assange’s extradition will finally be ordered,” Vamos predicted.
In a 66-page decision Tuesday, judge Victoria Sharp rejected most of Assange’s arguments but found that he had a “real prospect” of success on three grounds: that his extradition would be incompatible with the freedom of expression, that he might face prejudice because of his Australian nationality, and that the current framework for his extradition inadequately protects Assange from the death penalty.
U.S. officials have never raised the prospect of the death penalty in Assange’s case, and none of the…
This article was originally published by a www.washingtonpost.com . Read the Original article here. .
