TRANSCRIPT
Two British High Court judges say they would grant Julian Assange a new appeal unless US authorities give further assurances within three weeks about what will happen to him.
Mr Assange has been indicted in America on charges over Wikileaks’ publication in 2010 of hundreds of thousands of classified documents.
Mr Assange’s supporters say he is a journalist protected by the First Amendment who exposed US military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan that was in the public interest.
They have argued his prosecution is politically motivated and he can’t get a fair trial in the US.
The US government said Mr Assange’s actions went beyond journalism by soliciting, stealing and indiscriminately publishing classified government documents that endangered innocent lives.
Stella Assange, his wife, has criticised the British court ruling.
“I find the judgment utterly bizarre. As I said before, my impression is the court is tying itself in knots to find, basically passing the buck to the U.S. government and inviting it to contradict its own case in order to waive through his extradition. But this is par for the course in this case, bizarre decisions by the courts, unpredictable legal proceedings, exceptions.”
Judges Victoria Sharp and Jeremy Johnson said the US must guarantee that Assange, as an Australia citizen, should get the same First Amendment protections as a United States citizen, and that the death penalty would not be imposed.
The judgment is being seen as a partial victory for Julian Assange in his long legal battle.
Ms Assange says the case should simply be dropped.
“Now with this decision, I think the correct question is why don't you drop the case? Julian has been in prison for almost five years. This case serves no purpose other than to intimidate journalists all around the world. Not just here, not just in the United States. It is sending a chilling effect. It is creating not just a legal precedent, but a political precedent that is putting journalists all over the world at risk because it is setting a new normal.”
The ruling means the legal saga, which has dragged on for more than a decade, will continue — and Mr Assange will remain inside London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison.
Kristinn Hrafnsson, WikiLeaks editor-in-chief says it's time to bring the case to a close.
“Why continue this charade, this lawfare against Julian? In two weeks he will have spent five years in Belmarsh prison. Five years. And we still haven't come to a conclusion in this case. The onus now is on the U.S. government. That's where you should be going and ask them, you should drop the case because there's nothing left in it after today's verdict by the judges.”
Mr Assange's lawyer, Jennifer Robinson, says the court decision gives them grounds for appeal - and that she doesn't trust the United States to keep any promises it makes.
“Now, the judge's decision, of course, is that we get - we've got provisional permission to appeal on three grounds. On the fact that he would not be permitted to rely on the First Amendment. The risk that he be he'd be exposed to the death penalty and the risk that he'll be discriminated against on the grounds that he's Australian. The court has called - for what they want - satisfactory assurances to protect him against that. We say there's no such satisfactory assurance. Amnesty International says that US diplomatic assurances are not worth the paper they're written on. In a case as serious as this, involving the death penalty and involving free speech protections for all journalists everywhere. This is clearly insufficient.”
Australian politicians have welcomed the ruling.
Independent federal M-P Andrew Wilkie introduced a successful motion of support for Mr Assange in the lower house last month ((14 Feb)).
He says the court's decision to adjourn is good news.
“The delay is good in itself, getting those assurances are good in themselves, but what I think is even better than all of that, it does give us a three week window for Julian's legal team, and for Julian himself, to perhaps cut a deal with the US Department of Justice.”
The judges say a hearing will be held on May 20 if the US makes the requested submissions.
