Global Protest : February 24th – Update

‘Anything to say’ a public art project for freedom. Performance by Davide Dormino
London Roger Waters 22nd February

Roger Water’s intended speech has been recorded in Craig Murray’s blog

Amazing number of events across whole of UK listed in Wise Up – Welsh, Irish, Scottish, English grassroots solidarity network for Chelsea (formerly Bradley) Manning and Julian Assange

Why supporting Julian Assange means defending freedom of information

On the 20th February 2020  Anthony Bellanger writes

John Shipton, Julian Assange’s indefatigable father, armed with a smile, stood tall at the Palais des Académies in Brussels on 29 January 2020, at a ceremony awarding four Academic Honoris Causa by the Belgian network of academics, Carta Academica. The event was organised in honour of whistleblowers Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden and journalists Sarah Harrison and Julian Assange, who “each in their own way, have put their freedom and even their lives at risk to defend press freedom, freedom of expression and our right to information”.

Speaking before an audience of human rights and freedoms defenders, the Wikileaks founder’s father tirelessly insists that his son is in prison for exposing crimes committed by others. “In my country, Australia, but also in Sweden, the United Kingdom or the United States, it is usually reprehensible to conceal the truth, especially when it is about crimes.”

. . .

First hearing: Monday 24 February

On 24 February 2020, the first part of the hearing to decide on possible extradition to the United States will be opened for one week in the United Kingdom, before resuming for three weeks on Monday 18 May. “If Assange is extradited to the United States, he has no chance of a fair trial,” UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer told the Council of Europe in Strasbourg on 27 January. “Assange will be subjected to the same kind of summary justice as that seen in the United Kingdom a few months ago: a criminal trial, without any opportunity to prepare his defence. A summary hearing, of the kind we are seeing today in Turkey: 15 minutes, not one more. A quarter of an hour after entering the courtroom, Julian Assange was convicted, and even called ‘narcissistic’ by the judge.” Melzer was able to visit Assange in prison on 9 May 2019 and came away convinced that the case was highly politicised.

In his report for the United Nations, the special rapporteur describes the treatment received by Assange as “psychological torture”, after seven difficult years in the embassy. He said that there was no justification for having held Assange in virtual isolation for the nine months up until January of this year, recalling that, beyond 15 days, prolonged isolation is considered to be psychological torture.

The UK government refrained from answering the awkward questions posed by the UN special rapporteur, just as it remained silent when the Council of Europe questioned it following the publication of an alert issued by the International and the European Federation of Journalists on the Platform for the Protection of Journalism and Safety of Journalists, denouncing the arbitrary and disproportionate detention regime imposed on Julian Assange.

The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, representing 47 member states, stated in a resolution issued on 28 January regarding threats to media freedom and journalists’ security, that “the detention and criminal prosecution of Mr Julian Assange sets a dangerous precedent for journalists” and urged member states to “prevent any misuse of different laws or provisions which may impact on media freedom – such as those on defamation, anti-terrorism, national security, public order, hate speech, blasphemy or memory laws – which are too often applied to intimidate and silence journalists”.

. . .

Read whole article in Equal Times

Commissioner for Human Rights: Assange should not be extradited due to potential impact on press freedom and concerns about ill-treatment

20th February 2020, Dunja Mijatović Commissioner for Human Rights for Council of Europe reports

I have been following with great attention the developments concerning Julian Assange’s case, in particular the charges against him and the extradition request submitted by the United States government to the United Kingdom. In addition to my own monitoring and analysis, I have received information from medical professionals, civil society activists, human rights defenders, journalists’ associations and others on this case.

Julian Assange’s potential extradition has human rights implications that reach far beyond his individual case. The indictment raises important questions about the protection of those that publish classified information in the public interest, including those that expose human rights violations. The broad and vague nature of the allegations against Julian Assange, and of the offences listed in the indictment, are troubling as many of them concern activities at the core of investigative journalism in Europe and beyond. Consequently, allowing Julian Assange’s extradition on this basis would have a chilling effect on media freedom, and could ultimately hamper the press in performing its task as purveyor of information and public watchdog in democratic societies.

Furthermore, any extradition to a situation in which the person involved would be at real risk of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment would be contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment has made clear that he considers that both the detention conditions in the United States and the sentence likely to be imposed on Julian Assange present such a real risk.

In view of both the press freedom implications and the serious concerns over the treatment Julian Assange would be subjected to in the United States, my assessment as Commissioner for Human Rights is that he should not be extradited.

I will continue to monitor the developments in this case closely.

Original statement is available on the CoE web site

Donald Trump says he has the ‘legal right’ to interfere in criminal cases

On the 15th February 2020 ABC/Reuters reported

United States President Donald Trump says he has “the legal right” to interfere in criminal cases, which has raised questions about the independence of the American judicial system.

In the US, the executive, judiciary and legislature are supposed to be independent of each other, to ensure there are enough checks and balances to prevent an abuse of power by the Government of the day. 

But Mr Trump’s criticism of the judge, jury and prosecutors in the criminal case of his long-time adviser Roger Stone has thrown this balance into question. 

This happened days after the US Justice Department overruled its prosecutors’ recommendation that Mr Stone be sentenced to seven to nine years in prison, which prompted all four case prosecutors to resign in apparent protest.

Read Full Article in ABC News

Editors Note: Does this raise the possibility of Trump intervening in the case against Julian Assange if he were to be deported to the United States?

Editors Reflections:

  • Sondergericht (plural: Sondergerichte) was a German “special court”. After taking power in 1933, the Nazis quickly moved to remove internal opposition to the Nazi regime in Germany. The legal system became one of many tools for this aim and the Nazis gradually supplanted the normal justice system with political courts with wide-ranging powers. The function of the special courts was to intimidate the German public, but as they expanded their scope and took over roles previously done by ordinary courts such as Amtsgerichte this function became diluted.
  • Sydney Criminal Lawyer’s write “When Hitler became Chancellor of Germany in January 1933, he wasn’t about to let the judiciary get in the way of his aspirations for absolute power . . . After gaining power, Hitler took it upon himself to ‘coordinate’ the judicial system in order to ensure it was in line with Nazi ideals and objectives. No longer were courts independent, or a check against government abuses of power – they quickly became just another mechanism for Hitler to consolidate his dictatorship.
  • Holocaust Museum on Law And Justice in the Third Reich

Wilkie and Christensen: UK Expedition Extraordinaire

  1. Mr Wilkie Mission Statement 11th Feb

2. Sky News: Interview with Mr Wilkie 12th Feb

3. Wilkie and Christensen discussions with Nils Melzer 17th Feb

Andrew Wilkie MP tweets “In London and we met with UN Special Rapporteur on Torture @NilsMelzer to discuss Julian Assange. Nils left us in no doubt that Assange is showing the effects of psychological torture and feels betrayed by the justice system in the UK, the USA & Aus #auspol#politas#FreeAssange

Christensen, Melzer and Wilkie

4. Ruptly: Press Scrum outside Belmarsh Prison 18th Feb

From within that Press Scrum outside Belmarsh Prison (Christensen, Wilkie and John Shipton)

5. Sky News: Catch up with Mr Wilkie 18th Feb

6. ABC News coverage at Belmarsh Prison with Christensen Wilkie and Jennifer Robinson 18th Feb

7. ABC News coverage with Joyce, Wilkie, Christensen and Shipton
Editors Note: ABC News is confused about Julians current prison status. Julian is an unconvicted prisoner and the status is ‘awaiting extradition’ or remand.

8. Jeremy Corbyn and Andrew Wilkie Feb 18

ABC News report

Andrew Wilkie MP tweets “Impressed today by British Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn’s clear position & strong leadership on Julian Assange. This is what we need from Australian Labor Party right now where precious few members are prepared to take a stand over Assange injustice #auspol #politas #FreeAssange

Andrew Wilkie with Jeremy Corbyn

9. Press Conference Feb 19

Andrew Wilkie MP tweets “One of my press conferences today in London. The world is watching what happens to Julian Assange. Beyond time for Scott Morrison to pick up the phone to Boris Johnson and Donald Trump and bring #Assange home. #politas #auspol

Editors Note: The apparent difference in foreign press interest to Australian press interest.

Press Scrum on John Shipton after press conference

10. Alan Jones interviews Mr Christensen on Return Feb 29

Overview in 2GB (837AM)

Alan and George talk about many things including:
– trials and tribulations just getting to see Julian in Belmarsh Prison.
– a fellow prison who points to Julian when he walks in and says very loudly to Andrew and George “They’re doing really bad stuff to him. They’re doing really bad stuff to him, mate. He shouldn’t really be here.”
– the role Scott Morrison could play

Editors Note: Alan Jones mistakenly refers to rape charges being dropped. No charges were ever made in the Swedish investigation.

Yarra City Council offers support to Julian Assange

Yarra City Council joins Darebin Council in offering support to Julian Assange

Refer to full Council Meeting Minutes

12.2 Notice of Motion No. 2 of 2020 – Australian Citizen Julian Assange

Reference: D20/6065
Authoriser: Group Manager Chief Executive’s Office

Public Submissions
The following people addressed Council on the matter:
Camillo De Luca;
Walter Mellado; and
Travis Davies.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION
Moved: Councillor Jolly 
Seconded: Councillor O’Brien
1. That Council

  • (a) note that Julian Assange is in very poor health and currently facing extradition from the UK to the US in an unprecedented Espionage Act prosecution for engaging in journalistic activity and that if convicted, he faces 175 years imprisonment and therefore needs urgent Consular support to help him prepare his defence;
  • (b)  notes that Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for Europe, Massimo Moratti has said that the UK must not extradite Julian Assange to the USA and further stated:
    • (i)  “The British authorities must acknowledge the real risks of serious human rightsviolations Julian Assange would face if sent to the USA and reject the extraditionrequest. The UK must comply with the commitment it’s already made that hewould not be sent anywhere he could face torture or other ill-treatment.”; and
    • (ii)  “The UK must abide by its obligations under international human rights law thatforbids the transfer of individuals to another country where they would face serious human rights violations. Were Julian Assange to be extradited or subjected to any other transfer to the USA, Britain would be in breach of these obligations.”
  • (c)  notes that UN Special Rapporteur on torture, Nils Melzer said that:
    • (i)  “My most urgent concern is that, in the United States, Mr Assange would beexposed to a real risk of serious violations of his human rights, including his freedom of expression, his right to a fair trial and the prohibition of torture andother cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment…”; and
    • (ii)  “In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution he has never seen a group of democratic States ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law”.
  • (d)  notes that in an interview on RN Breakfast by the leading torture expert, Nils Melzer warned that Mr Assange could die in prison before getting his day in court and confirmed that the British Government’s handling of the extradition case is in blatant contravention of international Human rights Law;
  • (e) writes to the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs urging the Australian government to immediately step in to urge the British authorities address his poor health condition and to uphold the Human Rights of an Australian citizen just as they would if Mr Assange was being held in Iran, Egypt, Cambodia or Indonesia and not turn a blind eye to the violation of any Australian’s human rights, occurring in the West. The letter should also reference the points made above.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Tapes of Spaniards’ attempt to extort Julian Assange

Editor’s Note: While this is old, it adds depth to our understanding of the spying saga at the Ecuadorian Embassy

On the 20th June 2019 JOSÉ MARÍA IRUJO reported in EL PAÍS

“Do you work for free? This material is worth €3 million. We have to put food on our tables too, you know.”

Thanks to assistance from the police, there is recorded evidence of a meeting at Madrid’s Reina Victoria Hotel in which a Spanish reporter named José Martín Santos and two computer experts attempted to sell WikiLeaks sensitive material in connection with an alleged case of spying against Julian Assange while he was living at the Ecuadorean embassy in London.

In the recorded conversation, to which EL PAÍS has had access, the alleged extortionists said that there were microphones at the embassy, and that all recorded material involving the WikiLeaks founder was being handed over to the ambassador for review. Martín and one of his associates in Alicante offered WikiLeaks the opportunity to spy on their spies, for a price. Two of the three alleged extortionists have since been arrested and are now being investigated by the courts.

The Madrid meeting took place on April 3 at 7pm. Twenty-four hours earlier, WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson and Assange’s lawyer, Aitor Martínez, had met with the three would-be extortionists at the same hotel. And just a few days before that, the latter had cast their net on Twitter by offering to sell personal files about Assange’s seven-year stay at the embassy to the highest bidder.

At their second meeting, however, there were some extra guests that the sellers had not been expecting: several officers from the police Kidnapping and Extortion department, who monitored the entire conversation. Martín, a journalist who had been convicted to three years in prison for fraud in the past, opened the talks by asserting that he and his aides wanted to help the cyber-activist.

Read whole article in EL PAÍS

Doctors for Assange: The Lancet – doctors’ warnings on torture and medical neglect of Julian Assange

On 17th February 2020 an Email sent to the Australian Foreign Minister Senator the Hon Marise Payne by 117 Doctors from 96 countries.

Email reads:

From: Doctors for Assange doctorsforassange@gmail.com
Date: Mon, Feb 17, 2020 at 6:55 AM
Subject: The Lancet – doctors’ warnings on torture and medical neglect of Julian Assange
To: foreign.minister@dfat.gov.au
Cc: senator.wong@aph.gov.au, A.Albanese.MP@aph.gov.au

Dear Minister Payne,

Today, the world’s pre-eminent medical journal, The Lancet, will carry a letter on behalf of 117 doctors regarding the human rights and health emergency faced by Australian citizen and journalist Mr Julian Assange.

Mr Assange faces extradition to the United States under the Espionage Act for journalistic activity that is protected by the First Amendment of the US Constitution and under international human rights law.

On December 16, we wrote to you, as Australia’s Minister for Foreign Affairs, urging action on your part to protect Mr Assange’s civil, political and human rights. As our letter in The Lancet notes, to date we have received no reply.

117 doctors from 18 countries are today renewing their appeal. Mr Assange’s human rights to health care and freedom from torture must be upheld. At this late hour, we call on you to act decisively now to remove Mr Assange from conditions which UN authorities have found amount to “prolonged psychological torture” and “illegal and arbitrary” detention.

The letter will be available on the online edition of The Lancet here (in advance of the print edition) when the embargo lifts today February 17 at 23:30 (GMT):

http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30383-4/fulltext
Please be advised that a press release has been issued in Australia, the UK and in the United States, and we anticipate widespread public interest.

Yours sincerely,
Doctors for Assange

Full Letter reads:

On Nov 22, 2019, we, a group of more than 60 medical doctors, wrote to the UK Home Secretary to express our serious concerns about the physical and mental health of Julian Assange.1In our letter,1 we documented a history of denial of access to health care and prolonged psychological torture. It requested that Assange be transferred from Belmarsh prison to a university teaching hospital for medical assessment and treatment. Faced with evidence of untreated and ongoing torture, we also raised the question as to Assange’s fitness to participate in US extradition proceedings.

Having received no substantive response from the UK Government, neither to our first letter1 nor to our follow-up letter,2 we wrote to the Australian Government, requesting that it intervene to protect the health of its citizen.3 To date, regrettably, no reply has been forthcoming. Meanwhile, many more doctors from around the world have joined us in our call. Our group currently numbers 117 doctors, representing 18 countries.

The case of Assange, the founder of Wikileaks, is multifaceted. It relates to law, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, journalism, publishing, and politics. It also, however, clearly relates to medicine and public health. The case highlights several concerning aspects that warrant the medical profession’s close attention and concerted action.

We were prompted to act following the harrowing eyewitness accounts of former UK diplomat Craig Murray and investigative journalist John Pilger, who described Assange’s deteriorated state at a case management hearing on Oct 21, 2019.45 Assange had appeared at the hearing pale, underweight, aged and limping, and he had visibly struggled to recall basic information, focus his thoughts, and articulate his words. At the end of the hearing, he “told district judge Vanessa Baraitser that he had not understood what had happened in court”.6

We drafted a letter to the UK Home Secretary, which quickly gathered more than 60 signatures from medical doctors from Australia, Austria, Germany, Italy, Norway, Poland, Sri Lanka, Sweden, the UK, and the USA, concluding: “It is our opinion that Mr Assange requires urgent expert medical assessment of both his physical and psychological state of health. Any medical treatment indicated should be administered in a properly equipped and expertly staffed university teaching hospital (tertiary care). Were such urgent assessment and treatment not to take place, we have real concerns, on the evidence currently available, that Mr Assange could die in prison. The medical situation is thereby urgent. There is no time to lose.”

On May 31, 2019, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Nils Melzer, reported on his May 9, 2019, visit to Assange in Belmarsh, accompanied by two medical experts: “Mr Assange showed all symptoms typical for prolonged exposure to psychological torture, including extreme stress, chronic anxiety and intense psychological trauma.”7 On Nov 1, 2019, Melzer warned, “Mr. Assange’s continued exposure to arbitrariness and abuse may soon end up costing his life”.8 Examples of the mandated communications from the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture to governments are provided in the appendix.

Such warnings and Assange’s presentation at the October hearing should not perhaps have come as a surprise. Assange had, after all, prior to his detention in Belmarsh prison in conditions amounting to solitary confinement, spent almost 7 years restricted to a few rooms in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Here, he had been deprived of fresh air, sunlight, the ability to move and exercise freely, and access to adequate medical care. Indeed, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention had held the confinement to amount to “arbitrary detention of liberty”.9

The UK Government refused to grant Assange safe passage to a hospital, despite requests from doctors who had been able to visit him in the embassy.10 There was also a climate of fear surrounding the provision of health care in the Embassy. A medical practitioner who visited Assange at the embassy documented what a colleague of Assange reported: “[T]here had been many difficulties in finding medical practitioners who were willing to examine Mr Assange in the Embassy. The reasons given were uncertainty over whether medical insurance would cover the Equadorian Embassy (a foreign jurisdiction); whether the association with Mr Assange could harm their livelihood or draw unwanted attention to them and their families; and discomfort regarding exposing this association when entering the Embassy. One medical practitioner expressed concern to one of the interviewees after the police took notes of his name and the fact that he was visiting Mr Assange. One medical practitioner wrote that he agreed to produce a medical report only on condition that his name not be made available to the wider public, fearing repercussions.”11

Disturbingly, it seems that this environment of insecurity and intimidation, further compromising the medical care available to Assange, was by design. Assange was the subject of a 24/7 covert surveillance operation inside the embassy, as the emergence of secret video and audio recordings has shown.12 He was surveilled in private and with visitors, including family, friends, journalists, lawyers, and doctors. Not only were his rights to privacy, personal life, legal privilege, and freedom of speech violated, but so, too, was his right to doctor–patient confidentiality.

We condemn the torture of Assange. We condemn the denial of his fundamental right to appropriate health care. We condemn the climate of fear surrounding the provision of health care to him. We condemn the violations of his right to doctor–patient confidentiality.

Politics cannot be allowed to interfere with the right to health and the practice of medicine. In the experience of the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, the scale of state interference is without precedent: “In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political persecution I have never seen a group of democratic states ganging up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law.”712

We invite fellow doctors to join us as signatories to our letters to add further voice to our calls. Since doctors first began assessing Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy in 2015, expert medical opinion and doctors’ urgent recommendations have been consistently ignored. Even as the world’s designated authorities on arbitrary detention, torture, and human rights added their calls to doctors’ warnings, governments have sidelined medical authority, medical ethics, and the human right to health. This politicisation of foundational medical principles is of grave concern to us, as it carries implications beyond the case of Assange. Abuse by politically motivated medical neglect sets a dangerous precedent, whereby the medical profession can be manipulated as a political tool, ultimately undermining our profession’s impartiality, commitment to health for all, and obligation to do no harm.

Should Assange die in a UK prison, as the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has warned, he will have effectively been tortured to death. Much of that torture will have taken place in a prison medical ward, on doctors’ watch. The medical profession cannot afford to stand silently by, on the wrong side of torture and the wrong side of history, while such a travesty unfolds.

In the interests of defending medical ethics, medical authority, and the human right to health, and taking a stand against torture, together we can challenge and raise awareness of the abuses detailed in our letters. Our appeals are simple: we are calling upon governments to end the torture of Assange and ensure his access to the best available health care before it is too late. Our request to others is this: please join us.

We are members of Doctors for Assange. We declare no competing interests. Signatories of this letter are listed in the appendix.

Full list of attachments and references appear in The Lancet

Jeremy Corbyn Asks Boris Johnson If He Agrees Julian Assange’s Extradition Must Be Opposed

Mohamed Elmaazi writes on the 12th February 2020

Leader of the UK opposition Jeremy Corbyn challenged Boris Johnson as to whether he agrees with a resolution by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly that WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange should not be extradited to the US.

Corbyn’s query was part of a wider debate over what he called Britain’s “lopsided” extradition treaty with the US, during Prime Minister’s Questions on 12 February 2020.

“This deep disparity with the US is about to be laid bare when the courts decide whether the WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange will be extradited to the US on charges of espionage for exposing of war crimes, the murder of civilians and large scale corruption”. Corbyn said.

Corbyn went on to ask Johnson whether he agreed with a report from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe “that the extradition should be opposed and the rights of journalists and whistleblowers upheld for the good of all of us”.

Johnson refused to comment on Assange’s case, but noted that it is “obvious” that the rights of journalists and whistleblowers should be upheld, adding that the government “will continue to do that”.

Read whole article in Sputnik News

Corbyn question and Johnson response in Twitter