Supporters of Julian Assange protest against his extradition to the United States where he will potentially face life behind bars at the Royal Courts of Justice in London on February 21, 2024. Assange won the right to appeal his extradition on Monday. File Photo by Hugo Philpott/UPI | License Photo
A British High Court ruled on Monday that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can appeal his extradition to the United States where he faces espionage charges.
The ruling issued in London, means that Assange, an Australian national, can challenge whether he would be able to receive a fair trial in the United States, despite not being a U.S. citizen. Advertisement
As a result of the decision, Assange will be able to remain in Britain as he prepares his appeal, which seeks multiple assurances from U.S. prosecutors who charge that he endangered lives by publishing diplomatic cables and classified military files to WikiLeaks in 2010, alleging that U.S. soldiers were involved in civilian deaths in Afghanistan.
Assange faces 17 counts of espionage and one count of computer misuse for sharing the documents.
During Monday’s hearing, Assange’s lawyer Edward Fitzgerald said his client was not seeking assurance that he would be protected by rights under the First Amendment but simply that he “can seek to raise them” in his trial, adding that silence from U.S. prosecutors on the assurances he would receive has been “deafening.”
“Specific promises from prosecutors are pretty common,” Assange attorney Edward Fitzgerald said. “We will not object to bail. We will not seek the death penalty in this case. No such specific assurances has been given here.” Advertisement
James Lewis, representing the United States in the hearing, said Assange’s nationality would not impact his right to a fair trial but that his actions were not protected under the First Amendment.
“The position of the U.S. prosecutor is that no one, neither U.S. citizen nor foreign citizens, are entitled to rely on the First Amendment in relation to publication of illegally obtained national defense information giving the names of innocent source s to their grave and imminent risk of harm,” said Lewis.
Assange’s team has countered the U.S. claim that sharing the documents was not protected under the First Amendment, describing his actions as standard journalistic practice of sourcing and public information which the public has a legitimate right to know, characterizing the government’s case as a politically-motivated effort to persecute him for exposing criminal activity by the U.S. government.
“He exposed literally war crimes,” Assange’s wife, Stella Assange, told the BBC. “This case is the revenge of that country against openness and accountability.”
