British court rules Julian Assange can be extradited to U.S.

[Karl]

https://assangedefense.org/press-release/high-court-decision-grave-miscarriage-of-justice-says-julian-assanges-fiancee/

https://assangedefense.org/hearing-coverage/high-court-grants-u-s-appeal/

A UK court has overturned an earlier decision blocking the extradition
of Julian Assange to the United States where he is accused of
publishing true information revealing crimes committed by the US
government in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, Iraq, and
Afghanistan, and details of CIA torture and rendition. Julian Assange
was not given permission to attend the appeal hearing in person.

The prosecution against Julian Assange is an existential threat to
press freedom worldwide. Leading civil liberties groups, including
Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, ACLU, and Human
Rights Watch have called the charges against Julian Assange a “threat
to press freedom around the globe.” Journalist unions, including the
National Union of Journalists and the International Federation of
Journalists, have said that “media freedom is suffering lasting damage
by the continued prosecution of Julian Assange.” He faces a 175-year
prison sentence.

Responding to the decision of the High Court to overturn the lower
court’s earlier ruling to block the extradition of Mr. Assange, Stella
Moris, Julian Assange’s fiancee, said: “We will appeal this decision
at the earliest possible moment.”

Moris described the High Court’s ruling as “dangerous and misguided”
and a “grave miscarriage of justice.” “How can if be fair, how can it
be right, how can it be possible, to extradite Julian to the very
country which plotted to kill him?” she said.

On September 26, CIA plans to assassinate Julian Assange were
uncovered in a bombshell report. The detailed investigation revealed
that discussions of assassinating Julian Assange in London had
occurred “at the highest levels” of the CIA and Trump White House, and
that kill “sketches” and “options” had been drawn up on orders of Mike
Pompeo, then CIA director. The investigation revealed that plans to
kidnap and rendition Assange were far advanced and the CIA’s
operations prompted a political decision to produce charges against
him.

Editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks, Kristinn Hrafnsson said, “Julian’s life
is once more under grave threat, and so is the right of journalists to
publish material that governments and corporations find inconvenient.
This is about the right of a free press to publish without being
threatened by a bullying superpower.”

Amnesty International says the so-called ‘assurances’ upon which the
US government relies “leave Mr. Assange at risk of ill-treatment,” are
“inherently unreliable,” and “should be rejected,” adding that they
are “discredited by their admission that they reserved the right to
reverse those guarantees.” Amnesty concluded the charges against
Assange are “politically motivated” and must be dropped.

Julian Assange and Stella Moris are engaged to be married and have two
children, who are British and live in London.

Stella Moris will be giving a statement outside court following the
decision; updates via @wikileaks

--

Britain’s High Court ruled today to approve the United States’ appeal
of the District Judge’s decision not to extradite WikiLeaks publisher
Julian Assange, sending the case back down to the Magistrate’s level
for his extradition to be ordered. Assange’s fiancee Stella Moris
called the decision “dangerous and misguided” and a “grave miscarriage
of justice.”

Lord Justice Holroyde summarized the ruling and explained that the
High Court had denied three of the U.S. government’s five lines of
appeal argument which dealt with District Judge Vanessa Barrister’s
handling of evidence in assessing Julian Assange’s suicide risk upon
the order of his extradition. The High Court granted the U.S.
government’s two other grounds for appeal dealing with the so-called
‘assurances’ the U.S. purports to provide regarding the treatment
Assange would receive in prison.

The U.S. had argued to the High Court that Judge Baraitser should have
notified them during the extradition hearing that she was “minded” to
rule against extradition on grounds of oppressive conditions so that
it could provide assurances before she delivered her final verdict.

Assange’s defense argued in response, per the High Court’s summary,
“The offer of assurances comes too late. They do not remove the real
risk of detention subject to SAMs and/or in ADX, or the real risk of
detention in ADSEG and at Alexandria Detention Centre. In any event,
even if the assurances are admitted the appeal should not be allowed
but the case remitted to the judge with a direction to decide the
relevant question again.”

The High Court sided with the U.S. on this question, and found that
the assurances the U.S. gave were responsive to Baraitser’s specific
concerns regarding Assange’s prospective treatment. “It follows that
we are satisfied that, if the assurances had been before the judge,
she would have answered the relevant question differently,” they
write.

In ruling to allow the U.S. government’s appeal, the High Court sends
the case back down to the Westminster Magistrates’ Court with a
direction for the district judge to then send the case to the
Secretary of State to approve the extradition.

Responding to the ruling, Stella Moris said, “We will appeal this
decision at the earliest possible moment.”