Judge’s acceptance of ‘complexity’ of Assange’s case “is an important win”, says historian John Rees

Mohamed Elmaazi writes

Baraitser: Main hearing now to be held over 3 – 4 weeks

At the case management hearing Judge Baraitser announced that the main extradition hearing will now be scheduled to be held over three to four weeks, after initially scheduling it for around five days. Judge Baraitser’s decision followed the defence’s submission of “40,000 pages worth of documents” separated in six separate court bundles on:

  • The 1917 USA Espionage Act under, which Assange faces 175 years in prison
  • Proceedings as they relate to ex-military whistle-blower Chelsea Manning
  • Medical evidence from “three distinguished psychiatrists”
  • The Spanish judicial investigations as they relate to the bugging of Assange’s conversations with his lawyers in the Ecuadorian embassy
  • Public statements by US officials ‘denouncing’ Assange
  • Trial issues and prison conditions

Judge Baraitser remains unwilling to intervene with Belmarsh prison authorities

Despite the Judge’s apparent recognition of the seriousness and ‘complexity’ of the case she still refused to intervene with prison authorities to compel them to give Assange proper access to his case files and lawyers.

Assange’s barrister Edward Fitzgerald QC reminded the court that of the “great difficulties” the legal team was having in “getting to see Mr Assange for sufficient periods of time”.

But the judge said she was not prepared to go further than making a generalised statement in open court that it would be “very helpful” if prison authorities aided Assange with what he needed. This is despite being confronted with precedent, on 13 December, of another judge in a separate case called up Belmarsh prison in order to get them to ensure a prisoner had sufficient access to their lawyers.

Ress argued that Assange can’t get a fair trial if he isn’t able to properly prepare for his defence

Read full articles in Sputnik International and The Interregnum

Open letter to Scott Morrison regarding Julian Assange

Article included in the Independent Australian 17 December 2019

To: Prime Minister Scott Morrison

Copies to:
Minister for Foreign Affairs Marise Payne
Leader of the Opposition Anthony Albanese
Shadow Minister of Foreign Affairs Penny Wong

Dear Prime Minister,

In accordance with its duty to every citizen, the Australian Government must act to defend the beleaguered rights of Julian Assange.

Political reaction has caused him to be sought by the U.S., where he faces an effective death sentence of 175 years in prison for his role in publishing its internal documents. These included U.S. State Department communications and army logs of the wars it led in Afghanistan and Iraq — the latter of which was declared illegal by the UN Secretary-General.

To rationalise this on account of Wikileaks’ impacts is to condone punishment for releasing facts disseminated by major outlets. This is incompatible with press freedom, which in times of peace and conflict alike, hinges on the assurance that it will not be traded off.

Free expression is integral to transparency, without which democracy is necessarily a treacherous illusion. Genuine security thus stands or falls with the availed freedom to render power transparent.

Conversely, the war of aggression and oppressive surveillance amount to fake security, like the silencing of those who expose them, which, as a rule, is on false pretexts.

In 2010, a U.S. official was told in a State Department briefing that the impact of the leaks “was embarrassing but not damaging”, according to Reuters.

Courthouse News reported in 2013 that a former brigadier general heading the Information Review Task Force investigating the same leaks testified that they “did not lead to the deaths of any military sources”.

Assange’s character has been much maligned, but is not subject to legislation and is accordingly no justification for extradition. Yet his rendition to the U.S. would be a precedent to weigh on all of good character — especially those who align with him in vital publishing.

Britain attempted to extradite him to Sweden over allegations of sexual violence, though Women Against Rape said,

“We do not believe that is why he is being pursued.”

In November 2019, after nine years of Assange being cast as a suspected rapist, the preliminary investigation was dropped for the third time. The last two of them spurred the impropriety of a press conference furthering a prosecutor’s contentions, at additional expense to his reputation and without provision for his defence counsel to respond.

Assange was never charged, and despite arguing in court that he would likely be charged in Sweden, poverty of evidence moved the Swedish prosecutor to withdraw their European arrest warrant in 2013, before receiving the exculpatory testimony that Assange waited until 2017 for an opportunity to provide. The investigation only continued in the meantime due to pointed intervention of the British Crown Prosecution ServiceDon’t you dare get cold feet!”

The UK persisted in refusing to let him leave the Ecuadorian Embassy without facing arrest and a UN panel ruled that such effective detainment was arbitrary.

In cooperation with Britain, a new president in Ecuador complied with a written request from the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs to deliver Assange ‘to the proper authorities’.

Even the Ombudsman of Ecuador confirmed this expulsion as a breach of asylum laws, among others, and listed the violated articles.

Britain arrested and convicted Assange for breaching bail, citing failure to appear at a police station when requested. That request was issued with disrespect for the universal right to seek asylum, more than a week after the Embassy received him.

Assange was given a maximal sentence and endured the harshest prison conditions, simply for having sought and received asylum from another UN member state. Bail violation and absconding only apply if there is a breach of conditions without “reasonable cause”. Such causes naturally include asylum, which takes legal priority over extradition, including connected bail matters and for clearly justified reasons. Nevertheless, the judge was more interested in pronouncing him a “narcissist”.

The U.S. indictments against him only concern 2010 material from WikiLeaks and reveal no new information. Like the bail issue and Swedish investigation, such matters were evaluated by theUN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention for 16 months prior to its ruling.

Its independent findings remain applicable, and cannot be rivalled as authoritative, expert opinion on how Britain is constrained to act by its own ratification of covenants. Such binding legal protection of human rights would be absurd if optional.

In May this year, Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, presented Britain, Ecuador, Sweden and the U.S. with evidence of their extensive violations of legal protocol and duty concerning Assange. He also detailed the consequences of this, including emaciation, cognitive abnormalities and severe psychological suffering, as well as mortal risk if the strain placed on him was not immediately reduced.

The opposite occurred and his condition has strikingly deteriorated.

More than 80 doctors have now petitioned the UK Home Secretary, Priti Patel, as well as the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor Robert Buckland QC, to end this abuse and transfer him to a suitable hospital, in accordance with Professor Melzer’s explicit and urgent report to Patel’s predecessor.

To date, the UK Government has failed to respond in any way to the UN Rapporteur on Torture, other than by issuing a single reply and denying impropriety in two paragraphs, four months later.

This conduct is a brazen abrogation of absolute investigative and remedial obligations, under international and human rights law signed by Britain.

The UK Government is still resisting the hospital transfer request, which is a scandal that Australia will be increasingly culpable in, to the extent that it remains a passive witness.

No law or protocol prevents an Australian statesman from asking a British counterpart to relocate its citizen to a required university teaching hospital. Nor would it be possible in this case to refuse that request in a credible or politic way.

Julian Assange should not spend another day as a publisher held on remand, withering under effective solitary confinement in a poorly funded maximum-security prison.

Extradition to the U.S. would not culminate in a fair trial or bring an end to the torture, but likely make it worse and permanent, in Melzer’s researched, documented and mandated estimation, as a professor of international law at the University of Glasgow.

Relevant proceedings should be ended immediately by the UK Crown Prosecutor, who has the discretionary power to do this and like any person acting on the government’s behalf, must abide by ratified international law in that role. The Home Office should also commit in public to refuse any potential extradition directive from the judiciary.

All branches and parts of the implicated governments are obliged to uphold the spirit, as well as legally bound to the letter pertaining to international law.

This implies that Australia must do all in its power to ensure that Britain rectifies, in each way described, its treatment of an Australian citizen who happens to be the world’s most famous publisher.

It also means that extraterritorial prosecution must be vigorously opposed, and with particular respect to Assange, by way of openly and preemptively refusing his extradition from Australia to the U.S. This should occur in tandem with securing him the option, with an itinerary of his choosing, to be availed of diplomatic escort to a friendly Australian doorstep.

There is no latitude for a free and dignified nation to deviate from these positions, let alone the country of his birth.

In regards to U.S. relations, no alliance can remain special without healthy and respected boundaries. Foremost among these are sovereignty and human rights, neither of which are negotiable.

Parliamentary groups in support of Assange in Germany, Italy and the European Union as well as here in Australia are keenly mindful of that, and naturally gaining momentum.

London’s embarrassingly political prisoner has endured over 3,000 days of continuous detainment, and may not make it through the coming ones.

Intervention can be appropriate, and never more than now.

Bring Julian Assange home, safely and speedily.

Sincerely,

Daniel Ellsberg
Pentagon Papers Whistleblower

Julian Burnside AO QC
Human Rights Lawyer

Brian Toohey
Author and Australian Financial Review Columnist

William Binney
Former Technical Director, NSA

Mairead Maguire
Nobel Peace Laureate

Chris Hedges
Author and Pulitzer Prize-Winning Journalist

Craig Tuck
Transnational Defence Counsel

Wendy Bacon
Investigative Journalist and Walkley Award Winner, Pacific Media Centre

Ray McGovern
Former CIA Analyst, prepared daily brief for President Reagan’s top security advisers

Mary Kostakidis
Journalist and Former Chair, Sydney Peace Foundation

Margaret Ratner Kunstler
Civil Rights Attorney, Author and Editor

Andrew Fowler
Author and Journalist

John Kiriakou
CIA Torture Whistleblower

Chris Nash
Journalist and Former Professor of Journalism, Monash University

Dr Thomas Harré
Human Rights Lawyer

Dylan Welch
ABC Investigations Reporter

George Hunsinger
Professor of Systematic Theology

Jodie Evans
Co-founder of CODEPINK

Kellie Tranter
Lawyer, Researcher and Human Rights Activist

Emeritus Professor Brian Martin
Social Scientist, Wollongong University

Jeffrey Kaye PhD
Author of Cover-Up at Guantanamo

Carmen Grayson
Retired History Professor

Lakhdar Boumadiene
Former Guantanamo Prisoner

Emeritus Professor Frank Stilwell
Political Economy USyd. Vice President, Evatt Foundation

Tim Canova
Law Professor and Progress For All Chair

Andrej Hunko
MP German Bundestag and Member of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe

Doug Valentine
Author of The CIA as Organized Crime

Dr Piers Robinson
Co-director of the Organisation for Propaganda Studies

Dr Tim Anderson
Center for Counter Hegemonic Studies

Jacob Applebaum
Investigative Journalist and TOR Pioneer

Afshin Rattansi
Journalist, Sony Award Winner for Outstanding Contribution to International Media

Alastair Thompson
Co-Founder Scoop Independent News

Peter Forrest FAHA
Australian Philosopher

Davide Dormino
Artist, Sculptor of ‘Anything to Say?’

Dr Luke Fischer
Philosopher, Author and Overland Award-Winning Poet USyd

Nozomi Hayase
Writer and Journalist

Dr Scott Burchill
Senior Lecturer in International Relations Deakin University

Jennifer Powell
NGO Executive Director & U.S. Citizen Abroad

Myrna Lim
Journalist, Public Access Television San Francisco/Sacramento

Margaret Flowers
Paediatrician and Activist, Popular Resistance

Ahmar Mahboob
Associate ProfessorLinguistics University of Sydney

Kevin Zeese
Attorney and Activist, Popular Resistance

Dr Lissa Johnson
Psychologist and New Matilda Columnist

Diani Barreto
Independent Researcher, Advocate, Journalist

Emmy Butlin
Committee to Defend Julian Assange, UK

Elizabeth Vos
Consortium News Live Co-host

Dr Nick Riemer
Senior Lecturer English and Linguistics USyd

Trevor Fitzgibbon
US Public Relations

Dr David Coady
Senior Lecturer in Philosophy UTAS

Taylor Hudak
Journalist, Co-host, Action 4 Assange

Catherine Vogan
Australian Filmmaker

Dr Tony Lynch
Senior Lecturer in Philosophy UNE

Mara Kupka
Screenwriter and Artist

Gail Malone
Action-taker providing instruments for traumatised kids in war zones

Arianna Marchionne
Postdoctoral Researcher, University of Helsinki

Christy Dopf
Activist, Unity4J Spokesperson, Free Assange Vigil Host

Dr Evan Jones
Political Economy USyd

Kelley Lane
Independent Journalist

Michelle Wood
Activist, Artist

Felicity Ruby
PhD Candidate

Danielle Wood
Activist/Artist with People for Assange

Dr Binoy Kampmark
Lecturer School of Global, Urban and Social Studies RMIT University

Bruce Haigh
Former Australian diplomat

John Pilger
Award-winning journalist and filmmaker

Simon Floth
Philosopher, UNE

Michelle Pini
Executive Editor Independent Australia

David Donovan
Managing Editor Independent Australia

VIDEO: Julian Assange’s dad details son’s torture

Popular news journal, Independent Australia, together with the Queensland Council of Civil Liberties, hosted an event on Wednesday, 11 December 2019, to raise awareness for the plight of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, featuring his father John Shipton.

The conditions under which Assange is being held are worse than those of mass murderers and child sex offenders. Essentially in solitary confinement, he is not permitted internet usage. His visiting rights are limited to two half-hour visits per week. He cannot contact family or friends and his ability to prepare his own defence has been severely thwarted.

This, according to UN Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer, is

“prolonged exposure to psychological torture … and abuse [which] may soon end up costing his life.”

Read full article in the Independent Australia

‘The torture must stop’: Doctors urge Australia to bring Julian Assange back home

More than 100 doctors have urged Australia to lobby for imprisoned WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to be returned home for urgent medical treatment.

The group has written an open letter to Foreign Minister Marise Payne calling for the 48-year-old to be returned to Australia.

“Should Mr Assange die in a British prison, people will want to know what you, minister, did to prevent his death,” the letter says.

Read full article at SBS

JULIAN ASSANGE: Thursday 2019/12/19 case management hearing

On 12 Dec 2019, 11:01, Bridges for Media Freedom < bridges4media@riseup.net> wrote:

Email: contact@bridgesforfreedom.media
Phone: + 44 7717 618138 (Naomi) / +44 7501 673109

MEDIA ADVISORY

** Two UK medical practitioners and a German MP will attend Thursday’s
hearing as observers.

We are currently scheduling interviews for the following from 9.15am
outside Westminster Magistrates’ Court:

Sevim Dagdelen MdB

Dr Marco Chiesa MD FRCPsych Consultant Psychiatrist and Visiting
Professor, University College London

Dr David Morgan DClinPsych MSc Fellow of British Psychoanalytic Society
Psychoanalyst, Consultant Clinical Psychologist and Consultant
Psychotherapist

Please contact Bridges for Media Freedom to arrange an interview:
contact@bridgesforfreedom.media **

** We have been advised that the 20 December interview regarding the
Spanish surveillance matter will be conducted in private. Media and
public will not be admitted. **

JULIAN ASSANGE: Thursday case management hearing

WHEN: 10.00am on Thursday 19 December
WHERE: Westminster Magistrates’ Court, 181 Marylebone Road, London NW1

WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, who is fighting extradition to the
United States in an unprecedented Espionage Act prosecution for
journalistic activity, has a case management hearing this Thursday, 19
December at Westminster Magistrates’ Court.

Thursday’s hearing is being held the day after the deadline for the
service of defence evidence. The hearing is expected to determine
whether the main extradition hearing will be held in the final week of
February 2020, as is currently scheduled.

At a procedural hearing on Friday 13 December, Assange’s solicitor
Gareth Peirce expressed concern that progress was being impeded because
she was not being granted adequate access to her client. [1]

Julian Assange will participate in Thursday’s hearing by videolink from
HMP Belmarsh, where he remains detained on the medical ward.

Concerns for Julian Assange’s welfare have grown since his disoriented
appearance at a case management hearing on 21 October. Last month, UN
Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer renewed his warning that
Assange’s life is at risk. [2] An open letter from 60 medical
professionals called for Assange’s transfer to a university teaching
hospital. [3]

This week, a second letter from 100 medics has called on the Australian
government to facilitate Assange’s return to his home country for
medical treatment. [4] Two signatories of the open letters will be in
attendance at Thursday’s hearing.

In a separate matter, Julian Assange is expected to be present in
person at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on the morning of Friday 20
December to give witness testimony in a private hearing. There will be
no public or media access to this interview.

The purpose of this court appearance is to further a Spanish criminal
case concerning extensive surveillance conducted at Ecuador’s London
embassy. Julian Assange lived at the Ecuadorian embassy for close to
seven years as an asylee until his expulsion and arrest on 11 April
2019.

Prosecutors in the Spanish case allege that video and audio recordings
of legal meetings conducted within the Ecuadorian Embassy were shared
with the United States.

Assange will appear in person at Westinster Magistrates’ Court to be
interviewed as a witness to these events. The interview will be
conducted by Judge José de la Mata at Spain’s National Court in Madrid,
participating by videolink.

Notes

[1]
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/dec/13/lawyers-complain-about-lack-of-access-to-julian-assange-in-jail

[2]
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=25249&LangID=

[3]
https://bridgesforfreedom.media/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Letter_from_medical_doctors_re_Mr_Julian_Assange_22_Nov_2019_EMBARGO_TILL_MIDNIGHT_NOVEMBER_24.pdf

[4]
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/the-torture-must-stop-doctors-urge-australia-to-bring-julian-assange-back-home


Bridges for Media Freedom
https://bridgesforfreedom.media

Respected Press Freedom Organization Excludes Assange From Annual List Of Jailed Journalists

On 12th December 2019, Kevin Gosztola writes

“After extensive research and consideration, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) chose not to list Assange as a journalist, in part because his role has just as often been as a source and because WikiLeaks does not generally perform as a news outlet with an editorial process,” Mahoney declared.

Shadowproof contacted CPJ with questions for anyone at the organization who could answer.

What did this “extensive research” involve? Was it part of the same process that is employed for all journalists who are considered for inclusion on this annual list?

If the “editorial process” is a process that involves shepherding content until it is published, how does CPJ view the document-vetting process by which WikiLeaks authenticates whether documents are authentic or forged? Is that not a standard editorial process?

Is CPJ aware that Assange received the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism in 2011, following the work WikiLeaks did publishing documents from Chelsea Manning? This is work that the United States Justice Department criminalizes with their prosecution against Assange.

Are there any concerns within CPJ that prosecutors in the Trump Justice Department may now cite CPJ to further justify extraditing and prosecuting Assange?

Assange possesses two press cards. He has an International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) press card. Since 2010, he also has been a member of the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), a trade union in Australia.

According to the Committee to Protect Journalists’ methodology, Assange is a journalist.

“CPJ defines journalists as people who cover news or comment on public affairs through any media — including in print, in photographs, on radio, on television, and online.”

Assange routinely appeared on news programs and commented on “public affairs” prior to his arrest.

Harvard Professor Yochai Benkler testified as an expert on WikiLeaks and its role in the networked Fourth Estate at Pfc. Chelsea Manning’s trial. In a paper, He described WikiLeaks as an “organization that fulfilled a discrete role in network journalism, of providing a network solution to leak-based investigative journalism that in the past was done only by relatively large and unified organizations and now could be done in a network mode.” The media organization gathered “information relevant to public concern” and disseminated it to the public.

In fact, a 2008 Army Counterintelligence Center (ACIC) report on the possible “threat” posed to the U.S. Army by WikiLeaks (which Manning was convicted of disclosing to WikiLeaks), suggested the media organization engaged in journalism by attempting to “verify the information” in a secret National Ground Intelligence Center document on warfare in Fallujah, Iraq. This showed “journalist responsibility to the newsworthiness or fair use of the classified document if they are investigated or challenged in court.”

Read full articles in Medium and Shadowproof

The fate of journalism and Julian Assange

Senator Peter Whish-Wilson writes

Remember Terry Hicks? He is the father of David Hicks, former Guantanamo Bay detainee. Terry is a hero of mine, and features in a spray painting by @jamin.artist on the wall of my Parliament House office. 

I want to be reminded of Terry’s long hard struggle for the release of his son. He moved mountains with his endurance and the power of love for his son. As he stood in a cage in Times Square and Martin Place, sometimes spat upon, he never gave up. Although his son was considered a terrorist by our ally and many here in Australia, Terry never gave up. A massive community campaign resulted and that pressured the Howard government to lean on our close friend the USA, which saw David brought home to Australia. 

In December I showed this painting to Kristinn Hrafnsson and told him this story. An award-winning journalist and editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks, Kristinn came to Australia to speak at the National Press Club about the situation of Julian Assange. A similar endurance and broad community campaign is going to be necessary before we see Julian home, and until that day, I intend to continue the Greens’ enduring recognition of the dangerous precedent Assange’s case sets. 

In October, it ceased to be only the Greens getting this. For the first time in 10 years, we were joined by others and I’m proud to be part of the new Bring Julian Assange Home Parliamentary Group, co-chaired by fellow Tasmanian Andrew Wilkie, joined in the group also by Richard Di Natale, Adam Bandt and Nick McKim. 

When Kristinn met with parliamentarians and their staff, he discussed Assange’s terrible health situation. Isolated in a single cell on the health ward of Belmarsh prison for around 22 hours a day, the hallways are cleared when Assange walks through. It’s important to remember he has been detained for nine years for publishing information, spending ten days in Wandsworth Prison, 18 months under virtual house arrest, seven years in the Ecuadorian Embassy, and since 11 April 2019 he has been in Belmarsh maximum security prison. 

Moments after entering a UK courtroom on 11 April 2019, what occurred was what Julian and his legal team have predicted for almost a decade. The United States requested Julian’s extradition for the publishing activities of WikiLeaks, first unsealing a single charge under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, followed some weeks later by 17 additional charges under the Espionage Act – its first use against a publisher in US history, in which there is no public interest defence. If you read the indictments, they describe routine journalistic practices of taking measures to protect the identity of a source, and receiving and publishing information.

Finally, Kristinn thanked Eli Jessup, who received a $50 fine in court the day after Kristinn’s Press Club address for scaling Parliament House. The magistrate noted that many would commend Eli’s humanitarian response to Assange’s situation.

read full article on the The Greens web site

Julian Assange’s father calls on Government to help lobby for Wikileaks founder’s release

Samuel Davis reports

The father of imprisoned Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says the fight to free his son will fail unless the Australian Government applies greater diplomatic pressure on Britain ahead of his US extradition hearing next year

But Assange’s father, John Shipton, has revealed he has been working with Member for Dawson George Christensen to bring Assange home for more than a year, even drafting a letter “concerning Julian’s circumstances” to Foreign Affairs Minister Marise Payne last November.

The support of Mr Christensen, who this year formed a cross-party Parliamentary Working Group questioning whether Assange should face espionage charges in the US, is “absolutely vital”, Mr Shipton said.

“Julian’s diplomatic matter will only be solved with Australia’s involvement,” the 75-year-old said.

“Carrying the force of the Australian public to the court cases will cause the English judiciary to be very careful of their excesses.”

“In the case of Julian, he hasn’t been treated fairly. There’s no due process and no music to face.”

Mr Christensen said he and independent MP Andrew Wilkie would travel to London to meet Assange at Belmarsh Prison in February.

“We’re paying our own way to go and see him,” the Mackay-based MP said.

While celebrities and high-profile activists have championed his son’s cause, Mr Shipton urged Townsville Mayor Jenny Hill to throw her support behind Assange, who grew up in north Queensland.

“The fate of Julian Assange rests in our hands and the hands of local councils, the State Government, parliamentary groups and political parties,” he said.

“The Geneva Council passed a resolution that Julian ought to be offered asylum in Switzerland.”

Read full article ABC news

Julian Assange: December court dates

On 12 Dec 2019, 11:01, Bridges for Media Freedom < bridges4media@riseup.net> wrote:

Email: contact@bridgesforfreedom.media

MEDIA ADVISORY

** We have been advised that the 20 December interview will be
conducted in private. Media and public will not be admitted. **

Julian Assange: December court dates

WHEN: Friday 13 December, Thursday 19 December and Friday 20 December
WHERE: Westminster Magistrates’ Court, 181 Marylebone Road, London NW1

WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, who is fighting extradition to the
United States in an unprecedented Espionage Act prosecution for
journalistic activity, will be appearing in person at Westminster
Magistrates’ Court on Friday 20 December.

The purpose of this hearing is to further a Spanish criminal case
concerning extensive surveillance conducted at Ecuador’s London
embassy. Julian Assange lived at the Ecuadorian embassy for close to
seven years as an asylee until his expulsion and arrest on 11 April
2019.

Prosecutors in the Spanish case allege that video and audio recordings
of legal meetings conducted within the Ecuadorian Embassy were shared
with the United States.

Assange will appear in person at Westinster Magistrates’ Court to be
interviewed as a witness to these events. The interview will be
conducted by Judge José de la Mata at Spain’s National Court in Madrid,
participating by videolink.

A case management hearing in the extradition proceedings has been
scheduled for Thursday 19 December, also at Westminster Magistrates’
Court. An earlier hearing on Friday 13 December is expected to be
entirely administrative and will confirm that Assange remains in
custody at HMP Belmarsh, where he is detained on the medical ward.

Assange will participate in both of these hearings by videolink.

Concerns for Julian Assange’s welfare have grown since his disoriented
appearance at a case management hearing on 21 October. Last month, UN
Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer renewed his warning that
Assange’s life is at risk. [1] An open letter from 60 medical
professionals called for Assange’s transfer to a university teaching
hospital. [2]

Notes

[1]
https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=25249&LangID=

[2]
https://bridgesforfreedom.media/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Letter_from_medical_doctors_re_Mr_Julian_Assange_22_Nov_2019_EMBARGO_TILL_MIDNIGHT_NOVEMBER_24.pdf


Bridges for Media Freedom

Michael Rubbo “Lest we Regret”

I’ve called this film, Lest we Regret, because I’m convinced that if Julian Assange dies in prison or is extradited to the US, Australia will feel massive regret and guilt that his own country did so little to save him.  I address the film to MPs of all parties and to all Australians.

Our image of ourselves as a fair and caring country, is already damaged  and that many already regret.  But Assange is in a different category because abandoning him,  is tantamount to abandoning our commitment to the free flow of information which WikiLeaks has so effectively enabled. Millions of documents have been released and not one has proved to be fake news. It’s an amazing achievement as is the fact that no one has been hurt by these releases, only the powerful massively embarrassed.  
I’ve tried to make the film mainstream. I come in through the curious connection to a time in 1966 when Queen Elizabeth felt great remorse for her failure to respond to a tragedy in Wales. I’m figuring that many of the MPs who we need to see join the excellent initiative of Andrew Wilkie, are Coalition members  who,  hopefully,  will be intrigued by my approach.
 I then go on to counter the conventional idea that Assange is somehow disreputable. I take my audience to his most famous release,  the collateral murder video from 2010,  and show that the way he handled that horrific material was so sincere,  so admirable,  so unlike the information anarchist he’s been painted to be, that hopefully a new appraisal of him emerges in the minds of the viewer.  Our National regret will be even more painful when the Australian public realises what a hero they have abandoned. Regret is a very serious business. We hear of people in war  who have done terrible things,  such as we see in the collateral murder video, and are haunted for the rest of their lives. Australia will be haunted to its core if it abandons Julian Assange to an unjust fate.