Julian Assange: Future Generations of Journalists Will Not Forgive Us if We Do Not Fight Extradition
Peter Oborne on Julian Assange
Let’s imagine a foreign dissident was
being held in London’s Belmarsh Prison charged with supposed espionage
offences by the Chinese authorities.
And that his real offence was
revealing crimes committed by the Chinese Communist Party – including
publishing video footage of atrocities carried out by Chinese troops.
To put it another way, that his real offence was committing the crime of journalism.
Let us further suppose the UN Special
Rapporteur on Torture said this dissident showed “all the symptoms
typical for prolonged exposure to psychological torture” and that the
Chinese were putting pressure on the UK authorities to extradite this
individual where he could face up to 175 years in
prison.
The outrage from the British press would be deafening.
There would be calls for protests outside
the prison, solemn leaders in the broadsheet newspapers, debates on
primetime news programmes, alongside a rush of questions in parliament.
The situation I have outlined above is nearly identical to the current plight of Julian Assange.
There is one crucial difference. It is the US trying to extradite the co-founder of Wikileaks.
Yet there has been scarcely a word in the mainstream British media in his defence.
The fact that the US is an ally of Britain
is perhaps one reason why. That should make no difference as far as the
British media is concerned.
Indeed, Assange’s extradition hearing at
the Old Bailey next week marks a profound moment for British
journalists. Assange faces 18 charges under the US Espionage Act, which
carry a potential sentence of 175 years – put away for the rest of his
life.
But his case represents an attack on
journalism and democratic accountability. If Britain capitulates to
Trump’s America, the right to publish leaked material in the public
interest could suffer a devastating blow.
The British authorities have it within their power to refuse this extradition. Indeed, more than 160 legal experts wrote to the UK government last month, claiming they are obliged by international law to refuse the US request.
These lawyers are joined by human rights
campaigners and health professionals, who have been shocked by Assange’s
treatment in British custody and fear his rights will be further
violated if he is sent to the US.
The National Union of Journalists supports Assange. General Secretary Michelle Stanistreet has warned that the charges pose a threat that could “criminalise the critical work of investigative sources”.
And yet there has hardly been a sound from the British press.
There are many reasons for this relative
silence, but before addressing them, the gravity of the situation at
hand must be highlighted in the clearest of terms.
Assange is accused by the US of conspiring with whistleblower Chelsea Manning
to hack a Pentagon computer. The US indictment says Assange agreed to
attempt to crack a password (an attempt which was unsuccessful).
Crucially, the indictment also charges Assange with actions that are no
different to the standard practices of journalism.
For example, the indictment alleges that
“Assange and Manning took measures to conceal Manning as the source of
the disclosure of classified records”, as any professional journalist
would.
It claims that “Assange encouraged Manning” to provide the information. Again, this is how a journalist would act.
Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, made the situation clear:
“It is dangerous to suggest that these actions are somehow criminal rather than steps routinely taken by investigative journalists who communicate with confidential sources to receive classified information of public importance.”
To criminalise the protection of sources
will stop whistleblowers coming forward and will put journalists and
publishers at risk.
We need look no further than Manning’s own
leaks to realise what a loss this would be. It was Manning who provided
the so-called Iraq and Afghanistan war logs published by Wikileaks in
2010 and revealed the atrocity of US helicopter gunmen laughing as they
shot at and killed unarmed civilians in Iraq.
Fifteen individuals were killed in the
attack, including a Reuters photographer and his assistant. The US
military refused to discipline the perpetrators of this grotesque crime.
This was a story of momentous importance.
There is another, perhaps even more pressing issue that emerges in the use of the Espionage Act to charge Assange.
As Alan Rusbridger, former editor of the Guardian and one of Assange’s few defenders in the British media, told Press Gazette last month:
“It’s quite a disturbing thing that we should send somebody to another country for supposedly breaking their laws on secrecy. If journalists are not concerned by that, then I think they should be.”
I couldn’t agree more. The US is asserting
the right to prosecute a non-US citizen, not living in the US, not
publishing in the US, under US laws that deny the right to a public
interest defence.
It’s not difficult to imagine how this
precedent could be abused by authoritarian foreign powers. Imagine Saudi
Arabia prosecuting a journalist in London for revealing details of the
Jamal Khashoggi murder. Or China citing their Official Secrets Act to
charge a publisher responsible for disseminating footage of the horrific
treatment of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang.
The press would be up in arms and I cannot
believe the UK would extradite the individuals concerned. So why the
lack of support for Assange?
For one thing, the Assange saga is
protracted and complex. He was sentenced to 50 weeks by British courts
last year for breaching the Bail Act after he was dragged from Ecuador’s
London embassy. He had taken refuge there in 2012 to avoid extradition
to Sweden over sexual assault allegations.
This rightly led to questions surrounding
Assange’s character. Assange denies the allegations and insists he was
happy to be questioned in London.
The Swedish authorities discontinued their
investigation into Assange without him ever being charged. Assange’s
lawyers argue that fleeing to the embassy was an act of desperation to
avoid being passed to the United States.
Another contributing factor to Assange’s
pariah status is that he is not judged to be a journalist by a large
part of the industry. Reference is often made to Wikileaks’ decision to
publish huge amounts of unedited documents, which the US has claimed put
the lives of sources at risk. I don’t deny that makes me uneasy – and
that he has ethical questions to answer.
But it is also true that his case could
have a devastating, chilling effect on journalism and the UK government
has the ability to prevent this happening. Future generations will never
forgive the current generation of journalists unless we raise our game
and fight to stop the extradition of Julian Assange.
*
Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below.
Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site,
internet forums. etc.
The original source of this article is Press Gazette
Copyright © Peter Oborne, Press Gazette, 2020
Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page
Become a Member of Global Research
No comments:
Post a Comment