Category: Uncategorized

Written 23 November 2011 – Editor notes: A bit old but most interesting and still pertinent

Those who lobbied to have George W. Bush and Tony Blair tried for their role in the Iraq War have finally got their wish. Though the verdict of the court carries no legal weight, its supporters believe its symbolic value is beyond doubt.

The court in Malaysia where the trial took place may not have the power to convict, but the verdict against the former British and American leaders was unanimous.  “War criminals have to be dealt with – convict Bush and Blair as charged. A guilty verdict will serve as a notice to the world that war criminals may run but can never ultimately hide from truth and justice,” the statement from the Perdana Global Peace Foundation read.

…

Read whole article RT News

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

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

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

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

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

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

Edited by: Tim Zubizarreta

JURIST Guest Columnists Greg Barns, an Australian Lawyer and Adviser to the Australian Assange Campaign, and Lisanne Adam, a legal academic and Consultant in EU Human Rights, discuss how despite modern nations’ commitment to due process, Julian Assange is being denied due process at every turn…

…

In the case of the digital Robin Hood, Assange informed voices such as the United Nations special rapporteur on torture Nils Melzer and Bloomberg columnist Leonid Bershidsky argue that the likelihood that his case is considered by an impartial and unbiased judiciary and jury, is minimal or nil.

More specifically a premise of due process Audi Alteram Partem, is not guaranteed in the case of Assange. Audi Alteram Partem is a universally accepted due process guarantee that protects an individual against unfair governmental practices in the sense that it provides equal arms during criminal proceedings. In Brady v. Maryland, this right was emphasised to be about fundamentally protecting individuals from prosecutorial misconduct in withholding evidence. Equality of arms is an elemental safeguard against arbitrary treatment and an integral part of the scheme in it that it prescribes a range of minimum standards protecting parties’ equality.

But in Assange’s case earlier this year, US prosecutors obtained Assange’s legal defence strategy, medical records and other personal belongings from the Ecuadorian Embassy. This was an unlawful confiscation, a clear case of prosecutorial misconduct, that has been left unscrutinised by the UK judiciary through its allowing for the extradition proceedings to commence without further delay.

In the same vein, equality of arms also underpins the right to engage counsel and prepare a defence. The right to effective legal representation is undeniably a constituent of fundamental fairness. This right necessitates effective access to counsel and documents needed to prepare a defence effectively. Restriction of these rights enhance a disturbing departure from due process in it that it creates inequality of parties in proceedings.

Read full article in the Jurist

23rd November 2019

On Monday afternoon, an unlikely group of federal politicians will meet for the first time in Parliament House to strategise how they can bring home a man most of them concede is arrogant, deeply unlikeable and perhaps even worse.

The Parliamentary Friends of the Bring Julian Assange Home Group is a strange collection of sometime adversaries. Founded by Tasmanian independent Andrew Wilkie, it is co-chaired by both him and regional Queensland MP George Christensen. Wilkie describes their coming together as almost cosmic.

“It sort of happened organically; it was a bit like the Big Bang,” he says.

“Regrettably, Julian’s case has not been so much about the law, as it has become a political football. But this also provides an opportunity for a political solution.”

. . .

Joyce, Wilkie and Christensen will be joined at the table on Monday by independent Zali Steggall, Centre Alliance’s Rebekha Sharkie and Rex Patrick, Labor’s Julian Hill and Steve Georganas, and Greens MPs Peter Whish-Wilson and Adam Bandt. They will be briefed by Julian Assange’s London-based lawyer Jennifer Robinson and Australian barrister Greg Barns.

“The Australian government faces a very stark choice. Are they prepared to see an Australian citizen hunted down by the Trump administration to face 175 years in prison? Or are we prepared to do what we did in the David Hicks case, which is to say, ‘No, he is one of ours’ and stand up to them,” Barns tells The Saturday Paper.

What the group doesn’t have yet, as far as membership, is anyone from the Liberal Party. While Barns is set to meet with some Liberal MPs next week, he won’t name names.

. . .

Barns thinks this is starting to change. “Like the Hicks case, these issues often take time to develop and I think there is increasing concern now in the Australian community that Julian is effectively facing the death penalty,” he says.

“The most immediate issue for us is Julian’s mental and physical health and his inability to prepare properly for his case. He is being held in an inhumane environment.”

A bright spot, says Barns, is that Assange has now received consular assistance from the Australian government.

Read full article in The Saturday Paper