The Biden administration says it is ‘continuing to pursue extradition’ against the WikiLeaks founder
By Charlie Duffield
February 13, 2021 1:30 pm
The US government has appealed a UK judge’s decision against the extradition of WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange, a justice department official said.
The appeal confirms that Joe Biden intends to have Mr Assange stand trial on espionage and hacking-related charges, due to WikiLeaks’ publication of hundreds of thousands of US military and diplomatic documents.
The Biden administration is challenging the ruling delivered on 4 January, which found that Mr Assange would pose a suicide risk if he were extradited to the US for trial due to his mental health.
A justice department spokesperson, Marc Raimondi, confirmed to AFP: “We filed an appeal and we are continuing to pursue extradition.”
Mr Assange remains under detention by UK authorities pending the appeal, and could face a prison sentence of up to 175 years in the US if convicted there.
Transparency and media freedom issues
Protesters hold a sign to support WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in front of the EU British Embassy in Brussels (Photo: John Thys/AFP)
Supporters of Mr Assange and some human rights campaigners have called on Mr Biden to drop the case against the Australian national, which they assert raises sensitive transparency and media freedom issues.
Earlier this month, Mr Assange’s partner Stella Moris said: “I urge the (US) Department of Justice to drop the charges and the President of the United States to pardon Julian.”
After WikiLeaks began publishing US secrets in 2009, the Obama administration – in which Mr Biden was vice-president – initially declined to pursue the case.
Mr Assange claims WikiLeaks is no different than media outlets constitutionally protected to publish leaked materials. However, the organisation has faced questions over its decisions to publish files obtained via theft and hacking, and whether it can be legitimately considered journalism.
Donald Trump‘s 2016 election campaign was buoyed by WikiLeaks publishing Russian-stolen materials, which were detrimental to his opponent Hillary Clinton, and the justice department compiled a national security case against Mr Assange.
Supporters of Mr Assange and some human rights campaigners have called on Mr Biden to drop the case against the Australian national, which they assert raises sensitive transparency and media freedom issues.
Earlier this month, Mr Assange’s partner Stella Moris said: “I urge the (US) Department of Justice to drop the charges and the President of the United States to pardon Julian.”
After WikiLeaks began publishing US secrets in 2009, the Obama administration – in which Mr Biden was vice-president – initially declined to pursue the case.
Mr Assange claims WikiLeaks is no different than media outlets constitutionally protected to publish leaked materials. However, the organisation has faced questions over its decisions to publish files obtained via theft and hacking, and whether it can be legitimately considered journalism.
Donald Trump‘s 2016 election campaign was buoyed by WikiLeaks publishing Russian-stolen materials, which were detrimental to his opponent Hillary Clinton, and the justice department compiled a national security case against Mr Assange.
Espionage charges
In 2019, Mr Assange was charged under the US Espionage Act, and computer crimes laws, on several counts of conspiring with and directing others – from 2009 to 2019 – to illegally obtain and release US secrets.
According to the charges, he assisted hacking, illegally exposed confidential US sources to danger, and used the information to damage the US.
At the time, assistant attorney general John Demers said: “Julian Assange is no journalist.”
This week 24 organisations, including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International USA and Reporters Without Borders, urged Mr Biden to drop the case.
In an open letter they said: “Journalists at major news publications regularly speak with sources, ask for clarification or more documentation, and receive and publish documents the government considers secret.
“In our view, such a precedent in this case could effectively criminalise these common journalistic practices.”
No comments:
Post a Comment