Julian Assange’s Health Center in the decision to extradite to the United States

About Julian Assange has been extradited to the United States to be convicted of espionage law, now depends on whether a British appellate court finds that his safety would be in jeopardy if he was detained in a US prison.

During two days of hearings at Britain’s High Court, which ended today, Assange’s defense lawyers claimed that the WikiLeaks publisher was at high risk of suicide if he was sent to the United States to be charged because of his fragile physical and mental health. Prosecutors, for their part, argued that Assange, whose allegations are related to his work on WikiLeaks, was fit to be transferred, arguing that his conditions in the United States would not be troublesome.

The appeal hearing comes in response to an earlier ruling in January that rejected extradition on the grounds that Assange’s humane treatment could not be guaranteed in the United States and that he would be at high risk for suicide if placed in US custody. The British court today did not deliver a verdict immediately in response to the appeal, but said it would consider the arguments and issue a draft verdict at a later date. Judges have up to a month to make a decision, after which both sides still have the final chance to appeal to the British Supreme Court.

“It is quite reasonable to find it oppressive to extradite a mentally disturbed person because his extradition is likely to result in his death.”

At the heart of the problem is Assange’s health, which has deteriorated in the years he has been persecuted by the US government. Assange’s lawyer, Edward Fitzgerald, said in court yesterday that his client’s mental state is too threatened to be exposed to the risk of being put in solitary confinement in a US prison.

Although the US government has previously promised that Assange could serve his sentence for any conviction in an Australian prison, close to his family, his lawyers called these assurances “reserved, vague or simply ineffective”, noting that the process of getting him transferred to Australia could take years and the Australian Government has not yet committed to such a scheme.

“It is quite reasonable to find it oppressive to extradite a mentally disturbed person because his extradition is likely to result in his death,” Fitzgerald told the court and calls on the judges to “protect people from extradition to a foreign state where we have no control over what will be done against them.”

Related

▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄

For their part, the prosecution trusted that Gordon Kromberg, a controversial federal prosecutor who has taken the lead in the case, argued that Assange’s relationship would not be punishable in the United States, even if he was kept in a supermax prison, as he wanted access to various recreational activities for inmates as well as unlimited visits to his lawyers.

Assange was not present in court, although he briefly appeared via video link from the jail. His presence has been sporadic, and observers have noticed the visibly poor condition of his physical health during previous appearances. Assange is currently being held in the British Belmarsh Prison, where he has been staying since 2019, after his asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London was revoked.

Out-of-court protesters gathered during the hearing to demand that the British government prevent Assange’s extradition.

“It is completely unthinkable that the British courts could agree to this,” Assange’s partner Stella Morris told out-of-court protesters in a public speech. “I hope the courts will end this nightmare, that Julian can come home soon, and that the wise heads will win.”

Freedom of the press on trial

Assange’s case has remained a focus of civil liberties globally. Despite controversy over his political views and associations over the years, the serious threat to press freedom, represented by his potential disclosure of the espionage law’s allegations of WikiLeaks revelations, has encouraged a wide range of supporters.

In addition to published classified Foreign Ministry and CIA documents that have been drawn on by journalists and activists around the world, Assange also revealed video footage of U.S. troops in Iraq kill innocent civilians, published under the title “Collateral Murder”, during the Iraq war.

“The case involves concerns that go far beyond one man’s fate and jeopardize media freedom and freedom of expression.”

For these services, as well as to combat the precedent that his prosecution for publishing classified information would represent, international civil society groups continue to take a strong stand against his extradition. Whatever the UK courts decide in relation to this latest appeal, it is unlikely that their decision will represent the end of Assange’s legal saga.

“It is a condemnatory accusation that almost 20 years later, virtually no one responsible for alleged US war crimes committed during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars has been held accountable, let alone prosecuted, and yet a publisher who exposed such crimes is potentially Amnesty International’s Secretary General Agnès Callamard said in a statement on the case, calling for the extradition request to be rejected. the case involves concerns that go far beyond one man’s fate and jeopardize media freedom and freedom of expression. “