The hearing to determine whether Julian Assange should be extradited to the United States began on 24 February. If extradited, Assange faces charges of espionage, relating to allegations that he helped Chelsea Manning conceal her identity and publicly release full US government documents via WikiLeaks in 2011. The hearing lasted four days and was then adjourned until 18 May. SEAMUS O’TUAIRISC reports
Extradition hearings are usually held at Westminster Magistrates Court. However, in Assange’s case the hearing is taking place in the high security Woolwich Crown Court, next to Belmarsh prison. The judge is Vanessa Baraitser, who also presided over the earlier hearings which took place at Westminster. Observers have noted her obvious bias against Assange from the outset. At Assange’s latest bail hearing on 25 March Baraitser refused to release him, stating: ‘this global pandemic does not, of itself, yet provide grounds for Mr Assange’s release.’
During the February hearing, Assange was kept inside a bulletproof glass box in the back of the courtroom, making it hard for him to see or hear the court proceedings. A request was filed by his lawyers to allow him to sit with his legal team, but this was denied. Keeping Assange under such conditions is clearly being done to impose and demonstrate the terror and power of the state, as well as to keep the public, particularly his supporters who demonstrate outside, locked out.
The charges that are being brought against Assange by the US are based on accusations that he solicited classified material from Manning and helped her to decode a password in order to access this material, which includes diplomatic cables and documents relating to Iraq War rules of engagement. Mark Summers QC representing Assange demonstrated at great length that these accusations are untrue. Summers pointed out that Manning would have already had access to these documents and would not have needed a password.
Summers also made the case that documents relating to the Iraq War rules of engagement had not been solicited by Assange but Manning had provided them to WikiLeaks, along with videos depicting the murders of Reuters journalists and children as proof that the rules of engagement had been breached, despite the US Department of Defense claiming otherwise.
Baraitser made no attempt to hide her contempt for the defence argument and even interrupted Summers to ask if he was suggesting that authorities and government should have to provide context for charges. Summers simply replied that they should and gave examples of when the Supreme Court had said so in other extradition cases.
The defence has also made the case that Assange’s extradition is unlawful given that the charges are political. Article 4.1 of the US/UK Extradition Treaty specifically states that ‘Extradition shall not be granted if the offence for which extradition is requested is a political offense’. When presented with this, Baraitser responded that this exemption does not appear in the Extradition Act 2003. Although that is the case, the Treaty was ratified in 2007 and therefore the court has a responsibility to ensure the legality of the extradition under the it – a point made very clear by the defence.
The staggering disregard that the court has shown for the defence’s arguments, as well as Assange’s basic rights as a defendant are politically motivated. Both the British and US courts have deliberately discarded their own laws in order to make an example of Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning, and to show what happens to those who dare to expose the crimes of imperialism. Manning, who was originally court-martialled and sentenced to 35 years’ imprisonment, was pardoned by outgoing President Obama in 2017, after serving seven years. She was then sent back to prison in May 2019 and held until February this year, for refusing to testify to a Grand Jury which wanted to elicit information it could use to convict Assange. The federal court that released her is still insisting she owes $256,000 in fines for contempt of court.
Assange’s hearing is scheduled to continue on 18 May, although the Covid-19 outbreak may well change this. From the first four days of the hearing, a positive outcome does not look hopeful. This is why we need to continue to support Assange and demand his right to a fair trial. We need to stand with Assange and all others who continue to fight for the truth and for free, fair journalism.
Send letters of support to Julian Assange A9379AY, HMP Belmarsh, Western Way, London SE28 0EB.
For updates on Assange’s case, read the blog of former British ambassador and whistle-blower Craig Murray at https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/
Fight Racism! Fight Imperialism! No 275, March/April 2020
