The Official Australian Website in Support of Julian Assange
On the 16th May Whistleblower & Source Protection Program (WHISPeR) posted the letter below calling on UK Home Secretary, Priti Patel, to reject the US government’s request to extradite Wikileaks publisher Julian Assange
WHISPeR-Urges-UK-Against-Assange-Extradition-2Read original posting on WHISPeR web site
On the 10th May 2022, Duncan Campbell, posted his opinion in The Guardian
A decision from the home secretary is imminent. Extradition would set a disastrous precedent
Priti Patel now has to make one of the most important decisions of her career: will she bow to heavy pressure from the United States and send a vulnerable man who has been convicted of no crime to face an indeterminate number of years in an American jail where he may experience intimidation and isolation? Her decision is imminent and all other legal avenues have been explored.
This was the scenario 10 years ago in the case of Gary McKinnon, the computer hacker who, working out of his north London bedroom, trawled through the computer systems of Nasa and the US defence department in search of information about UFOs and left behind some mildly rude messages about the systems’ sloppy security. The home secretary was Theresa May, who halted extradition proceedings at the last minute.
Now Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder and also a vulnerable man – who has been in Belmarsh high-security prison for three years without being convicted of any crime – is facing extradition, with the issue due to be decided this month. Once again, the home secretary has an opportunity to demonstrate, as May did, that respect for justice and humanity are much finer and more enduring qualities than appeasement.
It is worth recalling the words of party leaders in support of McKinnon after Labour home secretaries – to their great shame – declined to intervene in the years after his initial arrest in 2002. Nick Clegg, then leading the Liberal Democrats in opposition, said that McKinnon “has been hung out to dry by a British government desperate to appease its American counterparts”. David Cameron, before he became prime minister, had said: “McKinnon is a vulnerable young man and I see no compassion in sending him thousands of miles away from his home and loved ones to face trial.”
The current case is different in that, while McKinnon remained at liberty, Assange has been held in custody alongside murderers and terrorists after the seven years he spent in the Ecuadorian embassy, seeking political asylum. He should have been given bail long ago to be with his wife, Stella Moris, whom he married in prison in March, and their two young children; he could simply be electronically tagged and monitored. It is also different in that he faces charges under the Espionage Act which carries a potential sentence of 175 years. And yes, the US criminal justice system does actually impose such medieval sentences.
Last year, at the Summit for Democracy, Joe Biden pledged to support a free press: “It’s the bedrock of democracy. It’s how the public stay informed and how governments are held accountable. Around the world, press freedom is under threat.” As it happens, it is 50 years since Daniel Ellsberg was being prosecuted under a similar law to the ones Assange faces for releasing the Pentagon Papers which exposed the lies and hypocrisies of the Vietnam war. He is one of Assange’s staunchest supporters. This week he told me that “this extradition would mean that journalists, anywhere in the world, could be extradited to the US for exposing information classified in the US”. He argues that it would also set a precedent that any reporter could be extradited to other countries for exposing information classified in those countries.Advertisement
Assange also has the backing of all organisations that battle on behalf of freedom of expression, from Amnesty International to Reporters Without Borders. As Julia Hall of Amnesty International puts it: “Demanding that states like the UK extradite people for publishing classified information that is in the public interest sets a dangerous precedent and must be rejected.”
In March, the justice secretary, Dominic Raab, told the Daily Mail of plans for a new bill of rights: “We’ve got to be able to strengthen free speech, the liberty that guards all of our other freedoms, and stop it being whittled away surreptitiously, sometimes without us really being conscious of it.” How empty those words will be if Assange is extradited.
It was, after all, thanks to WikiLeaks and Assange that the world saw the secret video of a US aircrew falsely claiming to have encountered a firefight in Baghdad and then laughing after their airstrike killed a dozen people, including two Iraqi journalists. Should our ability to see that footage be “whittled away surreptitiously”?
Another Assange advocate is Janis Sharp, McKinnon’s mother, who fought so gallantly on his behalf – a battle now being made into a film. “Ten years’ loss of liberty is surely more than long enough for an extremely ill, autistic man, a whistleblower who shared information of a war crime that he felt was in the public interest to know,” she told me. “Seeing my own son Gary McKinnon suicidal and in permanent mental torment through the terror of proposed extradition, leaves me in no doubt that much-needed compassion must be brought to bear in this very lengthy tragic case.”
Patel has an important choice, but it is not difficult. Extradition should be resisted. Assange should be released and allowed to resume a normal life. Anyone who seriously values freedom of expression should support his fight.
Read original article in The Guardian
On the 25 April 2022, Louise Nimmo reported in The Italian Insider
ROME – Italian senators, journalists and cultural leaders, as well as numerous Members of the European Parliament, have signed a letter addressed to British Home Secretary Priti Patel warning of the consequences on freedom of speech if she chooses to extradite Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to the United States, political sources said.
In the United States, Assange faces a sentence of up to 175 years in prison for helping to spread confidential documents on war crimes committed by US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The 51-year-old Australian national is currently awaiting the decision of the London government, which is due to be made within 28 days.
He faces 17 charges against him. US magistrates accuse him of conspiring to obtain information that was then disseminated on Wikileaks, which revealed, among other things, the thousands of civilians killed by the USA during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as secret units of the armed forces (Task Force 373) which intended to kill the Taliban without trial.
“What we fear,” reads the letter, “is, on the one hand, the extension of Assange’s detention, the consequences of which could prove fatal for the accused and, on the other, a warning to the press to refrain from collecting and disclosing information even if disseminated in the public interest.”
Among the signatories of the letter there are members of the Democratic and the Free and Equal party. The president of the Anti-Mafia commission Nicola Morra also signed, as did the president of the Press Federation Beppe Giulietti.
The following is the text of the letter from the exponents of politics, journalism and culture sent to the British Minister of the Interior Priti Patel:
We, the undersigned men and women from the world of politics, journalism and academia, turn to you in view of the crucial decision that you are called to take with respect to the extradition request of the publisher and journalist Julian Assange, urging you not to accept this request. We believe that the decision will mark a fundamental page of the right to know, as well as the life of the accused and the condition of the rule of law.
For three years, Julian Assange has been in pre-trial detention in a maximum security prison without any court having pronounced any definitive sentence against him. To them we must add another nine: it was Dec. 7, 2010, when he spontaneously introduced himself to Scotland Yard following a European mandate, issued by the Swedish judiciary, resolved with its dismissal. Since then, Assange has continued to face uninterrupted forms of detention.
The founder of Wikileaks contributed to the understanding of the reasons why a democracy cannot and must not be at the origin of serious violations of human rights to the detriment of hundreds of thousands of civilians already oppressed by the bullying of despots and the absence of fundamental rights .
The main international institutions and organisations dedicated to the defence and promotion of human rights have spoken out in favour of the release of Julian Assange. These are the same democratic institutions, founded following the devastation of the Second World War, to which we look with confidence and which have for some time been presenting a request to which we join and renew them: the end of the detention of Julian Assange.
On Dec. 4, 2015, the UN Group of Experts on Arbitrary Detention stated that “the adequate remedy would be to guarantee Mr. Assange and to grant him the executive right to compensation, in accordance with Article 9 (5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
On Dec. 21, 2018, the same Group specified that “States that base themselves and promote the rule of law do not like to deal with their own violations of the law. This is understandable. But when they honestly acknowledge these violations, they honour the very spirit of the rule of law, earn greater respect, and set a laudable example around the world.”
On April 5, 2019, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer, said he was alarmed by the possible extradition as the accused would risk suffering serious violations of his human rights, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, loss of freedom. of expression and deprivation of the right to a fair trial. On May 9 of the same year, Melzer visited Assange and found symptoms of “prolonged exposure to psychological torture.”
On April 11, 2019, the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, Agnes Callamard, said that the UK arbitrarily arrested the controversial publisher “probably endangering his life.” This statement is shared by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Michel Forst.
On Feb. 20, 2020, Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatovic, said: “Julian Assange’s potential extradition has human rights implications that go far beyond his individual case. The indictment raises important questions about the protection of those who publish confidential information in the public interest, including those exposing human rights violations. (…) any extradition in which the person involved is at real risk of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment is contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.”
Finally, on Dec. 10, 2021, Reporter Without Borders Secretary General Christophe Deloire said, “we firmly believe that Julian Assange has been targeted for his contributions to journalism and we defend this case because of its dangerous implications for the future of journalism and press freedom in the world.”
What we fear is, on the one hand, the extension of Assange’s detention, the consequences of which could prove fatal for the accused and, on the other, a warning to the press to refrain from collecting and disclosing information even if disseminated in the public interest. We are convinced that it is possible to allow public opinion to know the reasons behind crucial political-military decisions without this conflicting with the security needs of citizens.
For these reasons, we appeal to you, Minister, not to give the green light to the extradition of Julian Assange.
Signatories
Gianni Marilotti, senator
Andrea Marcucci, senator
Riccardo Nencini, senator
Roberto Rampi, senator
Elvira Evangelista, senator
Luciano D’Alfonso, senator
Tatiana Rojc, senator
Sandro Ruotolo, senator
Maurizio Buccarella, senator
Luisa Angrisani, senator
Danila De Lucia, senator
Francesco Verducci, senator
Mino Taricco, senator
Monica Cirinnà, senator
Andrea Ferrazzi, senator
Nicola Morra, senator
Paola Boldrini, senator
Primo Di Nicola, senator
Silvana Giannuzzi, senator
Giuseppe Pisani, senator
Gisella Naturale, senator
Francesco Giacobbe, senator
Luigi Di Marzio, senator
Elena Botto, senator
Fabrizio Ortis, senator
Margherita Corrado, senator
Fabrizio Trentacoste, senator
Simona Nocerino, senator
Marco Croatti, senator
Nicola Morra, senator
Mattia Crucioli, senator
Emma Pavanelli, senator
Maria Laura Mantovani, senator (33 senators)
Sabrina Pignedoli, MEP
Clare Daly, MEP
Mick Wallace, Member of the European Parliament
Francesca Donato, MEP
Martin Buschmann, MEP
Dino Giarrusso, MEP
Pierre Larrouturou, MEP
Ivan Vilibor SINČIĆ, MEP
Gunnar Günter BECK, MEP
Chiara Maria Gemma, European deputy
Carles Puigdemont, MEP
Antoni Comín, MEP
Clara Ponsatí, MEP
Rosa D’Amato, member of the European Parliament
Joachim Kuhs, MEP
Marcel de Graaff, MEP
Stelios Kouloglou, MEP
José Gusmão, MEP
Daniela Rondinelli, MEP
Ignazio Corrao, MEP
Diana RIBA I GINER, MEP
Marisa Matias, European deputy
Gunnar Beck, MEP
Laura Ferrara, member of the European Parliament
Özlem Alev Demirel, MEP
Eleonora Evi, European deputy
Vincenzo Vita, former parliamentarian and former undersecretary for telecommunications
Alberto Maritati, former senator and former undersecretary of justice
Gian Giacomo Migone, former senator and former president of the Foreign Comm. Senate
Luciana Castellina, former deputy
Aldo Tortorella, former deputy
Alfonso Gianni, former deputy
Gianni Tamino former member of parliament and former member of the European Parliament
Beppe Giulietti, president of Fnsi
Tommaso Di Francesco, co-director of Il Manifesto
Giovanni Terzi, journalist
Elisa Marincola, Article 21 spokesperson
Stefano Corradino, director of Articolo21
Valerio Cataldi, journalist
Paolo Barretta, Charter of Rome
Stefania Maurizi, journalist
Salvatore Cannavò, journalist
Pier Virgilio Dastoli, professor of EU law
Marino Bisso, journalist, NoBavaglio Network
Daniele Lorenzi, president of Arci
Danilo De Biasio, director of the Human Rights Festival
Lorenzo Frigerio, Free Information coordinator
Paola Slaviero, writer
Nicoletta Bernardi, computer science at the University of Perugia
Francesco Maggiurana. pianist
Gemma Guerrini, former city councillor and researcher, Aipd member
Read original article in The Italian Insider
On the 25th April 2022 this motion was tabled in the UK Parliament signed by 21 cross party members
That this House notes that Julian Assange faces extradition to the USA and a prison sentence of up to 175 years in a super-maximum-security prison for his journalistic work, carried out in the UK; notes that this includes the exposing of war atrocities and human rights abuses in US-led wars on Afghanistan and Iraq and in Guantanamo Bay; further notes that Amnesty International has warned that extradition of Julian Assange would have a chilling effect on the right to freedom of expression; while Reporters Without Borders, the International Federation of Journalists, National Union of Journalists and press freedom groups Article 19, Index and the European Centre for Press and Media Freedom oppose extradition and have warned against the criminalising of journalistic activities; believes that this case once again highlights how the UK’s extradition treaty with the US is fundamentally asymmetric and unbalanced in favour of the United States; notes that the Home Secretary will soon have to decide whether to extradite Julian Assange to the USA; and calls on the Home Secretary to reject extradition.
Supporting Members:
Burgon, Richard
Lucas, Caroline
McDonnell, John
Corbyn, Jeremy
Sheppard, Tommy
MacAskill, Kenny
Webbe, Claudia
Hanvey, Neale
Osborne, Kate
Bonnar, Steven
Law, Chris
Abbott, Ms Diane
Trickett, Jon
Ribeiro-Addy, Bell
Stephens, Chris
Williams, Hywel
Lake, Ben
Saville Roberts, Liz
Day, Martyn
Begum, Apsana
Maskell, Rachael
reference UK Parliament Web Site
Over the weekend of the 9th and 10th of April 2022, John Shipton sent a personal mail to 5000 Australian Resident supporters. It reads
Dear Friends,
I have just returned from London where I witnessed Stella and Julian somehow transcend the nightmarish conditions of HMP Belmarsh to celebrate their love for one another and our love for them.
Time is running out for Julian, his physical condition is shocking.
Years of psychological torture and arbitrary detention demand their bitter toll. He has been denied his final appeal and is now awaiting a US extradition order expected to be handed down on 20th April.
If Julian had been subjected to a fraction of such treatment in an Iranian, Syrian, Chinese or Russian prison, our own government would be publicly condemning such regimes as barbaric, immoral and corrupt.
Instead, our government remains complicit in silence to the wretched egregious persecution of Australian citizen, Julian Assange.
Our Australian media, too, remains questionably silent.
‘Ithaka’ is a documentary about my fight for my son’s basic rights. It is through this intimate portrait of us as his family members, that we can give you a sense of who Julian is.
It was not easy to be followed by a film crew in this difficult time, but I am doing what any parent would do for their child: everything you possibly can to get them out of the shit.
Most importantly, the film is a chance to provoke a broader discussion about what is at stake in Julian’s case. It is not just about my son. It is about the precedent his persecution sets.
To what ends will the most powerful nations go to in order to hide their crimes? What does that mean for the state of our press, and the integrity of our democracy? Julian is facing a 175 year sentence for releasing US state secrets. After all the whole world has acknowledged our right to know about the malfeasence he has exposed.
This documentary provides a chance to reignite the conversation about Julian on our terms.
Together, we stand against the abuse of power in all its forms.
‘Ithaka’ launches in cinemas around Australia on 21st April.
You can help:
It is obvious that we urgently need more in place to protect press freedom, and to ensure that no one else has to endure what my son is going through.
Thank you for taking the time to take action together, and make the most of the opportunit y this film presents.
Yours in hope,
On the 25th March, the Support Committee for Julian Assange (Sweden) handed a letter to the Swedish Parliament demanding answers to Nils Melzer questions to the Swedish Foreign Minister
A delegation from the Support Committee for Julian Assange in Stockholm handed over a letter demanding the Swedish Parliament to investigate the legality of government official’s actions in the case of Julian Assange. They met with Peder Nielsen, the Chancellor of the Swedish Parliamentary Committee on the Constitution, and Marilena Cottone, the Committee Assistant, from the Swedish Riksdagen´s Parliamentary Administration.
To the Members and Deputies of the Constitutional Committee
Karin Enström(M), Hans Ekström (S), Marie Granlund (S), Lars Jilmstad (M),Matheus Enholm (SD), Per-Arne Håkansson (S), Per Schöldberg (C),Mia Sydow Mölleby (V), Ida Drougge (M), Fredrik Lindahl (SD), LailaNaraghi (S), Tuve Skånberg (KD), Daniel Andersson (S), Tina Acketoft(L), Camilla Hansén (MP), Erik Ottoson (M), Sofie Eriksson (S), LarsBeckman (M), Alexander Ojanne (S), Annicka Engblom (M), Per Söderlund(SD), Ingela Nylund Watz (S), Linda Modig (C), Jessica Wetterling(V), Pontus Andersson (SD), Patrik Björck (S), Lars Adaktusson (KD),Maria Strömkvist (S), Bengt Eliasson (L), Lars Andersson (SD),Rasmus Ling (MP), Ann-Sofie Alm (M), Jörgen Grubb (SD), Allan Widman(L), Nina Lundström (L), Anna Sibinska (MP), Malin Björk (C), AliEsbati (V), Andreas Carlson (KD),Mikael Oscarsson (KD), Erik Ezelius(S), Kalle Olsson (S), Amanda Palmstierna (MP), Ulrika Karlsson (M).
The Swedish Government’s action in the case of Julian Assange must now be treated in a proper manner after the letter with 50 questions that the law professor Nils Melzer, the UN’s special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, has sent to the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). According to the Convention Against Torture that Sweden has ratified, Sweden is obliged to answer these questions, but the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not done so in a satisfactory way.
In his acclaimed book The Case of Julian Assange, published in German, English and Swedish (Karneval publishing house 2021), Nils Melzer describes what he calls “the greatest legal scandal of our time”, as an international, but also a Swedish, one. Sweden’s political and legal actions including numerous delays, missing answers and the systematic shift of focus became a way to neutralize one of the most important whistleblowers of our time who revealed very strongly suspected war crimes. Former Secretary General of the Swedish Bar Association Anne Ramberg and former Chief Prosecutor Sven-Erik Alheim are among the well-known lawyers who have sharply criticized Sweden’s handling.
The author Jan Myrdal claimed in a letter to the Constitutional Committee on 11 December 2014 that the then Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt’s statement to the press on 8 February 2011 not only constituted “a gross attempt to mislead public opinion” and “a blatant example of the cabinet rule that Chapter 12 of the Constitutional Instrument of Government § 2 shall prevent”, which damaged Julian Assange’s reputation.
Jan Myrdal also noted that documents revealed by Edward Snowden and reproduced in facsimile on page 230 in Glenn Greenwald’s book Big Brother Sees You: Edward Snowden and the Global Surveillance State (published in Swedish by Leopard 2014) show that on August 10, 2010, the United States asked nations with forces in Afghanistan – which included Sweden – to consider prosecuting Julian Assange. Three days later, on 13 August 2010, legal proceedings against Assange were initiated in Sweden. According to a reply from Tony Holmstedt, a Committee Assistant, to the author and journalist Stefan Lindgren, the Constitutional Committee had not processed Jan Myrdal’s letter.
Today we know that Sweden’s handling of the case later further resulted in Julian Assange being held in the high-risk prison Belmarsh in Great Britain where he, without being convicted of any crime, remains imprisoned under extreme torture-like conditions and runs a great risk of being extradited to the United States and a threatening life sentence.
All major human rights organizations and journalists’ federations have demanded the release of Assange and that U.S. Government under President Joe Biden drop the charges. Since the summer of 2018, the Support Committee for Julian Assange has, among other things, held some thirty manifestations in central locations in Stockholm and outside the U.S. and U.K. embassies as well as at mass media sites. We urge the Constitutional Committee to in turn urge the Government to answer the questions posed by Nils Melzer in accordance with Sweden’s obligations under international law.
The Swedish Support Committee for Julian Assange
Stockholm 23 of March 2022
Arne Ruth
Sigyn Meder
Kristina Hillgren
Aliro Cerda
Vania Ramírez
Anders Romelsjö
Christer Lundgren
Stödkommittén för Julian Assange
Support Committee for Julian Assange
support.julianassange@protonmail.com
Note: The Swedish constitution prohibits the interference by cabinet ministers (“minister rule”) in decisions to be made by independent government agencies/departments which are responsible that their decisions are guided by existing law and not by political interference.
Dwayne Booth (a.k.a., Mr. Fish) is a cartoonist, freelance writer and ScheerPost regular who has been published in many reputable and prestigious magazines, journals and newspapers. He has also written novels, screenplays, short fiction and cultural criticism collections, and several volumes of political cartoons.
More by Mr Fish on
ClownCrack
On the 25th February 2022 , the statement made at the Belmarsh Tribunal in New York City by Chris Hedges was posted in ScheerPost
We know what Julian did. We know the great public service he provided. We know that he and WikiLeaks, aided by courageous figures such as Chelsea Manning, gave us the most important journalist coup of our generation, ripping back the veil erected by the ruling political, military, and financial elites to expose their mendacity, their corruption, and their crimes. We know that populations around the world, from Haiti to Tunisia, were empowered by this information to hold these elites accountable.
But today I want us to reflect on Julian himself. For Julian, endowed with precocious skills, could easily have been someone else. He could have sold his talents to Silicon Valley, to Wall Street or to intelligence and surveillance agencies, who would have paid handsomely. He could have built a lucrative career, one where he was financially secure, perhaps wealthy. He could have obtained the possessions we are told in our consumer society we should aspire to, an opulent house, luxury cars, financial security, fine clothes, and the status that comes with material acquisition and advancement within the structures of power. No worries. No controversy. No persecution.
But to follow this route, a route many have followed, would have required Julian to surrender his integrity and dignity. It would have required him to forsake justice and freedom to suppress and control the aspirations of the vast majority locked outside the golden gates of privilege and power. It would have placed him within the interlocking systems designed by the ruling elites to concentrate privilege, wealth, and power among themselves. It would have required Julian to become a cog in the megamachine, to play a part in constructing our corporate totalitarianism.
Julian chose not to do this. He turned away from the siren call of success, at least as it is defined by the powerful. He set out on the difficult road taken by all who fight the oppressor on behalf of the oppressed.
A life of meaning is a life of confrontation. When you resist radical evil you jeopardize your career, your reputation, your financial solvency and at times your life. It is to be a lifelong heretic. When you stand with the oppressed, the crucified of the earth, then you are treated like the oppressed. You too are crucified. And that is what is happening to Julian.
Those that care the most, are targeted and killed by those who care the least.
Prometheus, in defiance of the divine prohibition, gave fire to humankind, making possible knowledge, art, science, technology, and civilization. For his empowerment of mortals, the gods sentenced Prometheus to eternal torment. He was bound to a rock and an eagle, the emblem of Zeus, the emblem of power, ate out his liver by day. At night his liver grew back. The next morning it would be painfully torn out again in a never-ending cycle. Julian’s story is the modern version of this ancient myth.
Julian gave us knowledge and with that knowledge he gave us power. For this act of defiance, he will never be forgiven by those he exposed.
Albert Camus writes that “one of the only coherent philosophical positions is revolt. It is a constant confrontation between man and his obscurity. It is not aspiration, for it is devoid of hope. That revolt is the certainty of a crushing fate, without the resignation that ought to accompany it.”
“A living man can be enslaved and reduced to the historic condition of an object,” Camus warned. “But if he dies in refusing to be enslaved, he reaffirms the existence of another kind of human nature which refuses to be classified as an object.”
Julian affirms the existence of another kind of human nature. He refuses to be classified as an object. His example calls upon us to confront radical evil, no matter the cost. To stand with Julian is to stand with yourself. To abandon Julian is to abandon yourself. And if you abandon yourself then your life becomes “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury. Signifying nothing.”
Read original article in SheerPost
More by Chris at ScheerPost
On the 9th February 2022, Nils Melzer posted on Twitter that the English version of his new book had been published
“This is a landmark book, the first by a senior international official to call out the criminality of Western governments, and their craven media echoes, in the persecution of Julian Assange. Mark the word, persecution, says Nils Melzer, as well as ‘our’ responsibility for the ravages inflicted on an heroic man for telling forbidden truths and on democracy itself.”
– John Pilger
Book is available at the publishers, Verso Books
On the 10th February 2022, the Australian Broadcasting Commission news service posted this article.
An online auction of digital art has raised more than $US52 million ($72 million) worth of cryptocurrency to help fund WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s legal defence, the winning bid coming from a group of supporters who had pooled their money.
Australian-born [and Australian citizen] Assange is battling extradition from Britain to the United States where authorities want him to face trial on 18 criminal charges including breaking a [US] spying law, after WikiLeaks began to publish thousands of [US] secret classified files and diplomatic cables in 2010.
Last month, Assange, who remains in a London prison, was given the chance to challenge approval of his extradition at Britain’s highest court.
The Supreme Court will now decide whether or not to hear his case.
Assange collaborated with a crypto artist known as Pak to sell a collection of NFTs (non-fungible tokens) called Censored in an online auction from February 7-9 to raise funds to support his case.
NFTs are a kind of crypto asset that uses blockchain to record the ownership status of digital files such as images, videos and even items within online games.
The centrepiece of the auction was an NFT artwork, Clock, that displays the number of days Assange has been imprisoned in white text on a black background. It updates each day.
The Clock NFT fetched 16,593 of the cryptocurrency ether, a sum worth around $72 million.
It was bought by a group of more than 10,000 Assange supporters called AssangeDAO.
A Decentralised Autonomous Organisation (DAO) is a sort of online community which allows members to pool their money and use blockchain-based tokens to vote on decisions about how the group is run.
Proceeds from the sale of Clock will go to support Assange’s legal defence.
“In less than one week, we have shown that decentralised and distributed peoples can band together to fight injustice.”
Another member of the AssangeDAO team, Amir Taaki, told Reuters: “The AssangeDAO represents a Rubicon that’s been crossed”.
The auction also allowed supporters to create their own NFTs, choosing an amount to pay and typing in a short message which gets turned into an image showing the words struck through, as though censored.
Supporters raised more than 671 ether ($A2.9 million) in this way, creating 29,766 “censored” messages, with the proceeds going to pro-freedom organisations chosen by Mr Assange and Pak.
NFTs surged in popularity last year, leaving many people baffled as to why so much money is being spent on items which do not physically exist and which anyone can view for free.
But NFT enthusiasts say their value comes from their social status or origin story. Others see them as a way to bet on the development of “Web3”, or the Metaverse.
In December last year, more than 28,000 people bought items in an NFT sale by Pak which fetched $127.8 million in total.
Read original article in ABC news
and many articles including Art News, Wired and Fortune