Julian Assange updates: WikiLeaks founder’s bid to avoid US extradition

We will be closing this live page soon. Here’s what happened on the second and final day of the extradition hearing.

• The US side presented its arguments why the UK High Court should not permit Assange to appeal his extradition from the UK to the US.
• Lawyers for the US said the WikiLeaks founder should be extradited to face spying charges because he put innocent lives at risk by releasing hundreds of thousands of classified US government documents.
• They also said Assange could not be “treated as akin to an ordinary journalist or Wikileaks akin to an ordinary publisher”.
• The 52-year-old’s lawyers had told the court on Tuesday the case was politically motivated, arguing Assange was targeted for his exposure of “state-level crimes”.
• The judges said they would reserve their decision. It was not immediately clear when the verdict would be announced.
• Assange was again not in court on Wednesday, nor watching remotely, because of his poor health condition, his lawyers said.

In September 2021, Yahoo News reported that CIA officials had drawn up options for former US President Donald Trump’s administration for dealing with Assange while he was holed up in Ecuador’s embassy in London. They included assassinating or kidnapping him, it said.

Stella Assange the following month said the media report was a game-changer in his fight against extradition from the UK to the US.

“It shows the true nature, the true origins, the true criminality of the US actions against Julian,” she told reporters at the time.

You can find out more in the Listening Post episode below:

Assange’s legal team has intervened, with lawyers Edward Fitzgerald and Mark Summers pushing back against some of the arguments made by the US side, referencing among others alleged plot to kill or kidnap the WikiLeaks founder.

Andrew Wilkie, an Australian member of parliament attending the hearing, has said he hoped that the Australian parliament’s call last week for Assange to be allowed to return to his homeland sent a strong message to the UK and US governments to end the legal fight.

“This has gone on long enough,” he said.

In London to support Julian Assange’s hearing on whether he can appeal his extradition to the US. Julian’s extradition would strike at the very heart of free speech & democracy. Enough is enough. The US must drop the extradition of Julian Assange. #FreeAssageNow #auspol #politas pic.twitter.com/j3zpbpORI3

— Andrew Wilkie MP (@WilkieMP) February 21, 2024

The extradition hearings began in the United Kingdom in February 2020 and were due to resume in May of the same year, but were then delayed amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

In January 2021, Judge Vanessa Baraitser said Assange should not be sent to the United States due to his frail mental health, adding there was a risk he would attempt suicide.

Besides his mental health, Assange’s physical health has also declined in prison. In October 2021, he experienced a mini-stroke. He also broke a rib while coughing. His wife has said he has aged prematurely.

However, the US authorities won an appeal in December 2021 at London’s High Court against this decision, after giving a package of assurances about the conditions of Assange’s detention if convicted, including a pledge that he could be transferred to Australia to serve any sentence.

Jordan Higgins, of the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom, has told Al Jazeera the case is not only a “critical juncture” for the future of press freedom.

“It is also one of utmost importance for the wellbeing of Julian Assange himself who may face life in prison in the US should he be extradited.”

Assange’s lawyers have said he faced a US prison sentence of up to 175 years, but the US legal team disputes that in its argument.

The lawyer for the US also responded to the WikiLeaks founder’s lawyers who cited an alleged US plan to kidnap or murder Assange while he was in London’s Ecuadorean embassy, reported by Yahoo News in 2021.

Dobbin said the US had given assurances about how Assange would be treated that “wholly undermine this suggestion … that anything could happen to him”.

In its arguments, the legal team for the US government has tried to distance Assange from the profession of journalism, telling the court that the WikiLeaks founder went beyond journalism in his bid to solicit, steal and indiscriminately publish classified US government documents.

Lawyer Clair Dobbin argued that in encouraging Manning and others to hack into government computers and steal from them, Assange was “going a very considerable way beyond” a journalist gathering information.

Assange was “not someone who has just set up an online box to which people can provide classified information,” she said. “The allegations are that he sought to encourage theft and hacking that would benefit WikiLeaks.

Therefore Assange could not be “treated as akin to an ordinary journalist or Wikileaks akin to an ordinary publisher”, Dobbin said.

She added that it was not necessary for WikiLeaks to publish sensitive material, including names of those who could be endangered. Media outlets that went through the process of redacting the documents before publishing them are not being prosecuted, she said.

In concluding her address to the pro-Assange crowd, Stella Assange called on them to stay outside the premises and march to Downing Street  after the proceedings are over this afternoon.

Number 10 Downing Street is the official residence and the office of the British prime minister in London.

The human rights lawyer and Assange’s wife has just spoken to the crowd gathered outside the High Court in London.

She described the US case as “pathetic” and alleged that it was based on “lies”.

What they’re trying to argue is that state secrets trump revealing state crimes. This is the balance they’re trying to shift. They want impunity, they don’t want to be scrutinised and journalism stands in the way,” she told the cheering supporters.

“In that courtroom, they’re having to make their position increasingly clear. They have to admit that what they’re doing is criminalising journalism. It’s criminalising the truth,” she said.

“They are liars, they are criminals and they are persecuting the journalist who exposed them,” she added, calling her husband a “truthteller” and a “political prisoner”.

“The world is watching these courts in how they deal with this case.”

With the session now adjourned, let’s bring you up to speed with some of the US prosecution’s main arguments:

• Lawyer Clair Dobbin told the court that Assange’s prosecution is “based on the rule of law and evidence”.
• Dobbin also argued that the prosecution could not be political as it has been pursued by multiple US administrations
• The lawyer also said Assange damaged US security and intelligence services and “created a grave and imminent risk” by releasing the classified documents.
• Assange is not being prosecuted for his “political opinions”, Dobbin told the judges.
• WikiLeaks founder “indiscriminately and knowingly published to the world the names of individuals who acted as sources of information to the US”, she said.

The court has now broken for lunch.

The press freedom group has also called on the US government to cease Assange’s “endless persecution” and drop the 13-year-old case.

“No one should face such treatment for publishing information in the public interest,” said Rebecca Vincent, the media watchdog’s director of campaigns, said.

“It’s time to protect journalism, press freedom, and all of our right to know. It’s time to free Assange now.”

RSF's Rebecca Vincent speaking outside Julian Assange court hearing this morning: "RSF is engaged because of Julian Assange's contribution to journalism…he exposed war crimes and human rights violations…If he is extradited, the chilling effect will be enormous" #FreeAssange pic.twitter.com/O87pQ4IHW3

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 20, 2024

Alice Jill Edwards earlier this month called on the UK government to halt the possible extradition of Assange to the US, urging authorities to consider his appeal based on substantial fears that, if extradited, he would be at risk of treatment amounting to torture or other forms of ill-treatment or punishment.

“Julian Assange suffers from a long standing and recurrent depressive disorder. He is assessed as being at risk of committing suicide,” Edwards said. “If extradited, he could be detained in prolonged isolation while awaiting trial, or as an inmate. If convicted, he could be sentenced to up to 175 years in prison,” she added.

“The risk of being placed in prolonged solitary confinement, despite his precarious mental health status, and to receive a potentially disproportionate sentence raises questions as to whether Mr Assange’s extradition to the United States would be compatible with the United Kingdom’s international human rights obligations,” the UN special rapporteur continued, noting that the US government’s assurances of “humane treatment” were not a sufficient guarantee.

“Diplomatic assurances of humane treatment provided by the Government of the United States are not a sufficient guarantee to protect Mr Assange against such risk,” Edwards said. “They are not legally binding, are limited in their scope, and the person the assurances aim to protect may have no recourse if they are violated.”

“I call on the Government of the United Kingdom to carefully review Mr Assange’s extradition order with a view to ensuring full compliance with the absolute and non-derogable prohibition of refoulement to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and to take all the necessary measures to safeguard Mr Assange’s physical and mental health,” the expert said.

A reminder that the two justices could deliver a verdict today or at a later date.

If it’s in Assange’s favour, a full appeal hearing will be held to again consider his challenge.

But if the WikiLeaks founder loses, his only remaining option would be at the European Court of Human Rights.

Stella Assange has said his lawyers would apply to the European judges for an emergency injunction if necessary.