Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision | Next revisionBoth sides next revision | ||
| nils_melzer_-_a_dangerous_verdict_-_20210226 [2021/04/11 16:31] – iris | nils_melzer_-_a_dangerous_verdict_-_20210226 [2021/04/11 16:49] – iris | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| - | **AJC**:// There is an extradition treaty between the USA and Great Britain, can you explain to us what is contractually stipulated in it. Should there be no extradition at all in the Assange case?// | + | |
| + | {{ : | ||
| **Prof. Melzer**: Julian Assange is currently in custody in Great Britain, pending a possible extradition. There are 18 charges against him in the USA, 17 of which relate to so-called espionage. What is being called espionage here, however, is simply the publication of secret US government documents, and publishing is what investigative journalists do professionally on a daily basis. Assange did not steal the documents, he got them from whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who at the time had access to these documents, but who herself violated her duty of secrecy by releasing the material to WikiLeaks. | **Prof. Melzer**: Julian Assange is currently in custody in Great Britain, pending a possible extradition. There are 18 charges against him in the USA, 17 of which relate to so-called espionage. What is being called espionage here, however, is simply the publication of secret US government documents, and publishing is what investigative journalists do professionally on a daily basis. Assange did not steal the documents, he got them from whistleblower Chelsea Manning, who at the time had access to these documents, but who herself violated her duty of secrecy by releasing the material to WikiLeaks. | ||
| Line 42: | Line 43: | ||
| **AJC**:// Why did the judge pass these sentences? She found him virtually “guilty on all counts”. // | **AJC**:// Why did the judge pass these sentences? She found him virtually “guilty on all counts”. // | ||
| - | **Prof. Melzer**: In these hearings [in London], it was a question of determining whether there were grounds for extradition. The question of guilt would then be put before an American court. | + | {{ : |
| The American logic – inherently criminalising investigative journalism as espionage – was now substantiated by the judge in London. She even went on to explain that this would be equally punishable in the UK under the so-called “Official Secrets Act”. The judge also ruled out the argument of political offence. This is completely unrealistic – it is absolutely clear that political motivation is involved here. She even said that the prohibition of extradition for political offences was not applicable. That is a legally untenable argument. | The American logic – inherently criminalising investigative journalism as espionage – was now substantiated by the judge in London. She even went on to explain that this would be equally punishable in the UK under the so-called “Official Secrets Act”. The judge also ruled out the argument of political offence. This is completely unrealistic – it is absolutely clear that political motivation is involved here. She even said that the prohibition of extradition for political offences was not applicable. That is a legally untenable argument. | ||