Assange: Day X

Which form of a mockery will the British High Court of Justice make of itself this time?

Feb 20, 2024

[Assange - by Mr. Fish, echoing the myth of Prometheus.]

Published: 2024-02-20

Day X

Julian Paul Assange's legal representatives are applying to the High Court of Justice to hear an appeal to the previous decision won by the US' representatives which overturned the initial Magistrate's decision to deny extradition.

In Julian Assange's Final Appeal Chris Hedges culls the excrutiating reasons for Assange to receive a hearing so that justice may be done down to a very fine list. The brevity to which Hedges has restricted himself is painfully laudable.

Consortium News' Cathy Vogan has provided more detail, including some insights into the potential nature of the appeal, should Britain's hightest court deign to accept the appeal application. This application focuses purely on aspects of the case which will create legal precident, as the previous application was rejected by the court for being too broad.

Kevin Gozstola’s The Dissenter has provided extensive background on the appeal and Assange's treatment by the courts, the media, the CIA and others.

A consortium of major news publishers who have collaborated with Wikileaks have re-issued their call for the US Justice Dept. to drop the case, echoing the recent law passed in Australia, and stating that journalism is not a crime.

Unsurprisingly, the “Committee to Project Journalists” has again omitted Assange from its list of imprisoned journalists, exposing their cowardice.

The Beginnings

The early phase of Assange's persecution has possibly passed from memory.

He had consentual sexual activities with two different Swedish women while visiting Sweden over a decade ago. They learned of each other and, concerned for transmission of sexual disease, contacted the Swedish police. Assange complied with requests by the police and consulted with them to receive leave to depart for the UK.

Thereafter, Sweden issued a Red Notice, an alarming legal mechanism within the EU for states to request immediate assistance from other states in apprehending potential criminals. This is the basis for the character assassination “trial by media” which then ran in parallel to a series of revelations from Wikileaks about US war crimes and other crimes, including torture.

The Red Notice was the basis for Sweden to demand Assange be extradited to Sweden. Assange, rightly fearing that this would be one step before the final destination, the US, fought this case in the UK courts to have his attempt to prevent the extradition denied. This led Assange to seeking and receiving political asylum from Ecuador.

Following Assange's asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy, the British parliament passed a law which prevented the type of Red Notice accepted ever being allowed to be used again to facilitate extradition. The Red Notice was signed by a prosecutor, not a judge.

Stephania Mauritzi, an Italian journalist who had partnered with Wikileaks, later obtained via Freedom of Information applications proof that the current leader of Britain's Labour Party, Sir Starmer, then head of Britain's Crown Prosecution Service had threatened the Swedish equivalent to not get "cold feet" on the Assange extradition. The reason they may have was that it was causing political trouble for Sweden for Assange who had unendingly, publicly stated that he would be most pleased to speak with the Swedish investigative officers via video link, as is a regular process, anytime.

No charges were ever filed against Assange for any crime of any sort ever by Sweden. There was no case. It was an investigation undertaken based on political pressure, presumably from the US.

Assange's legal persecution has beeen political from the outset.

When Nils Melzer, then UN Special Rapporteur for Torture (and other forms of degrading treatment) finally chose to look at Assange's case after numerous entreaties, he was shocked to learn that everything he thought he knew about the case was false. He had been misled by pure political propaganda.

Being fluent in Swedish, and a lawyer, he investigated the Swedish legal process, reading the original Swedish legal documents. So outraged was he by the abuse of process that he published a book on the topic.

This is all before we learn that the CIA had been planning to assassinate Assange, that the FBI witness "Siggy" was a liar and pedophile, that the CIA had UC Global spying on Assange's legal meetings and all of the other myriad abuses of process and persecution which were constantly oppressing Assange.

The late Daniel Elsberg, of Pentagon Paper's fame, acknowledged that the case against Assange is easily the most important press freedom case since he released the Pentagon Papers over 50 years ago.

or support this work via Buy Me A Coffee or Patreon.

Sources

Julian Assange's Final Appeal, Chris Hedges, ScheerPost, 2024-02-18

US Deceptions at the Heart of Assange Case, Cathy Vogan, Consortium News, 2024-02-19

An Open Letter from Editors and Publishers: Publishing is Not a Crime, ScheerPost, 2024-02-18

Australian PM Albanese and 85 Other MPs Vote to End Assange Incarceration, Diego Ramos, ScheerPost, 2024-02-15

Assange's Wife, Lawyer Warn He Will Die If Extradited to the US, Dave DeCamp, Antiwar, 2024-02-19

The Trial of Julian Assange, Nils Melzer, Verso Books

The Dissenter, Kevin Gozstola [Editor]

Secret Power: WikiLeaks and Its Enemies, YesXorNo, 2022-11-08

WATCH: Facing Injustice, Consortium News, 2024-02-19

Chris Hedges interviewed Stella Assange, Jen Robinson and Kristinn Hrafnsson Monday about the hearing this week in Julian Assange’s extradition case.