Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- the_persecution_and_prosecution_of_assange_and_wikileaks--faq [2021/04/05 14:33] – [Why won't Assange get a fair trial in the USA?] miumiu
+++ the_persecution_and_prosecution_of_assange_and_wikileaks--faq [2021/08/10 09:33] (current) – [The Persecution and Prosecution of Assange and WikiLeaks FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (F.A.Q)] editor42
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 \\
 \\
-**Click on the questions to open and read the answers.**
-Display all the answers:
-~~stoggle_buttons~~
 ===== THE POLITICAL PERSECUTION OF ASSANGE AND WIKILEAKS - WAR ON JOURNALISM =====
@@ Line 106: / Line 102: @@
 ==== If Assange is found guilty, will journalists who published WikiLeaks documents be also be prosecuted?====
-{{ :memes:this_is_fine.jpg?500|}}The US government is claiming that Assange is not a journalist and that WikiLeaks' reception, analysis and authentication of documents isn't journalism. This is done in order to break support from journalists and the mainstream press at large. If they don't support him and let him go to the US, they would be complicit in this strategy, which precisely aims at creating a precedent where any of them could be next.
+{{ :memes:this_is_fine.jpg?500|}}The US government is claiming that Assange is [[https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/04/07/assange-is-not-a-journalist-yes-he-is-idiot/|not a journalist]] and that WikiLeaks' reception, analysis and authentication of documents isn't journalism. This is done in order to break support from journalists and the mainstream press at large. If they don't support him and let him go to the US, they would be complicit in this strategy, which precisely aims at creating a precedent where any of them could be next.
 During the extradition hearing, the prosecution representing the US clearly stated that the US Espionage Act *could* be used against any journalist revealing national security information. It just hadn't been used for that purpose... thus far.
-It is also worth noting that the US DoJ already expressed their position: as Assange is not a US citizen (then why should he be tried under US law?), he wouldn't benefit from the "first amendment" protection. Any non-US journalist in the world could hence be threatened by the same legal construction: charged under the United States' Espionage Act, but not protected under its First Amendment...
+It is also worth noting that the US DoJ already expressed their position: as Assange is not a US citizen (then why should he be tried under US law?), he wouldn't benefit from "First Amendment" protection. Any non-US journalist in the world could hence be threatened by the same legal construction: charged under the United States' Espionage Act, but not protected under its First Amendment...
-While the prosecution claimed that they wouldn't go after the biggest news outlets (New York Times, Guardian, etc.) who partnered with WikiLeaks while releasing the 2010 logs, video and cables, nothing in their argumentation seems to guarantee that. Nothing was mentioned about not using the same legal persecution against smaller news organisations.
+While the prosecution claimed that they wouldn't go after the biggest news outlets (New York Times, Guardian, etc.) who partnered with WikiLeaks in releasing the 2010 logs, video and cables, nothing in their argumentation seems to guarantee that. Nothing was mentioned about not using the same legal persecution against smaller news organisations.
@@ Line 127: / Line 123: @@
 After October 1st, the defence team has one month to write their closing statement, after which time the prosecution has two weeks to send their comments (the defense will then have one more week to comment on legal points raised by the prosecution).
-The verdict is expected to be announced on January 4th 2021.
+The verdict is expected to be announced on January 4th 2021. ☞ More info on [[https://challengepower.info/usa_uk_vs._assange/4th_jan_2021_-_extradition_verdict|the verdict]]
 Whatever the decision, it is likely that the losing party will appeal to the High Court. It could then move on to the UK Supreme Court, and even to the European Court for Human Rights.
+**Stay informed** on the next steps of the procedure using this regularly updated [[https://challengepower.info/flowchart_extradition_assange_next_steps_after_january4_2021|flowchart]]
@@ Line 142: / Line 140: @@
-==== Why is he still in a super-max jail today?====
+==== Why is he still held in a super-max prison today?====
-{{ :london_belmarsh_prison_aerial_view.jpg?nolink&450|}}Good question!  A multi-award winning publisher, nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, sits in a super-max prison nicknamed "the UK Guantanamo" with mass-murderers, terrorist-suspects and other violent criminals, while the authors of the war crimes he denounced keep enjoying their freedom and impunity...
+{{ :london_belmarsh_prison_aerial_view.jpg?nolink&450|}}Good question!  A [[https://challengepower.info/assange_s_awards_and_recognition|multi-award winning publisher]], nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, sits in a super-max prison nicknamed "the UK Guantanamo" with mass-murderers, terrorist-suspects and other violent criminals, while the authors of the war crimes he denounced keep enjoying their freedom and impunity...
 When Assange was detained in the "medical" wing of the prison -which many witnesses describe as having worse conditions of isolation than the rest of the prison- the prisoners of Belmarsh themselves petitioned -three times- to the prison direction to end this unfair treatment.
@@ Line 169: / Line 167: @@
 ...but when read in details, it appears truly concerning :
   * the only reason for him to not be extradited is a combination of his poor health and how terrible the US prison system is;
-  * the rest of the decision negates the journalistic and political nature of WikiLeaks' work. Major releases of documents related to war crimes are judged as neither being of general interest, nor political.
+  * the rest of the decision negates the journalistic and political nature of WikiLeaks' work; major releases of documents relating to war crimes are deemed by a court judge as **not** of general interest, neither are they considered political in nature.
   * the rest of the decision also negates the diligent efforts made to redact out of the released materials any sensitive information that could put anybody at risk.
@@ Line 181: / Line 181: @@
 At the time of writing, it is certain that:
-  * The US will appeal the first instance decision of Jan. 4th;
-  * The US Accusation submitted their "grounds for appeal" (they will likely question Assange's mental health diagnosis and challenge parts of the decision declaring the US prison system too harsh for him to be sent there);
+The Prosecution (USA)
-  * The Defense team filed in their "respondent's notice", in response to the grounds of the US accusation;
-  * The Defense team should file in their "cross-appeal notice" (deadline postponed to April 6th), requesting that the appeal ALSO concern the rest of the decision, thus attempting to cancel parts of the decision denying the journalistic and political nature of WikiLeaks and Assange's work.
+  * (A) The US will appeal the first instance decision of Jan. 4th;
+  * (B) The US Accusation submitted their "grounds for appeal". They will likely question Assange's mental health diagnosis and challenge parts of the decision declaring the US prison system too harsh for him to be sent there);
+The Defence (Assange)
+  * (C) The Defence team filed in their "respondent's notice", in response to the grounds of the US accusation (B);
+  * (D) The Defence team should file in their "cross-appeal notice" (deadline postponed to April 6th), most likely requesting that the appeal ALSO concern the rest of the decision, thus attempting to cancel parts of the decision denying the journalistic and political nature of WikiLeaks and Assange's work.
 Next steps will be:
-  * the US accusation submitting their "respondent's notice" to the "cross-appeal notice" (sic) filed in by the defense;
+  * (E) the US accusation submitting their "respondent's notice" to the "cross-appeal notice" (sic) filed in by the defence (D);
-  * a decision by one judge in the Court of Appeal to allow this appeal;
+  * (F) A Court of Appeal judge will decide whether or not to allow this appeal (E);
-  * appeal hearing (that could be in the same hearing as the decision to allow the appeal) and decision;
+  * (G) Subject to authorisation, the appeal hearing (regarding E) will take place - possibly at the same hearing where the authorisation decision (F) itself will be given.
+  * (H) The decision;
-Depending on the result of the appeal, there may or may not be an appeal-of-the-appeal before the supreme court.
+Depending on the result of the appeal (H), there may or may not be an appeal-of-the-appeal (I...?) before the Supreme Court.
 ==== Will Assange's situation change now that Biden is the president of the US? ====
 {{ :the_actors:usgov:300x300-1200px-seal_of_the_central_intelligence_agency.svg.png?nolink&150|}}
-The Biden administration [[https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/12/us/politics/julian-assange-extradition.html|announced that they would continue Trump's prosecution and extradition attempt of Assange]].
+Biden's Department of Justice [[https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/12/us/politics/julian-assange-extradition.html|announced that they would continue Trump's prosecution and extradition attempt of Assange]].
-This is in spite of  the Obama administration's previous conclusions that [charges against Assange should be dropped as they would create a dangerous precedent for press freedom], and consistent with [[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nF8WRFw5sHQ|Biden's 2010 declaration about Assange being a "high-tech terrorist"]] (sic).
+This is in spite of  the Obama administration's previous conclusions that [charges against Assange should be dropped as they would create a dangerous precedent for press freedom], and consistent with Biden's 2010 declaration about Assange being a "high-tech terrorist" (sic):
+{{ https://challengepower.info/_media/videos/assange_a_high_tech_terrorist_biden.mp4 }}.
@@ Line 205: / Line 213: @@
 What is clear at this stage is that:
-  * [[superseding_indictment_-_24-06-2020|the US indictment against Assange]] refers to other people associated with WikiLeaks, so they may also be sued for "espionage" in the US in the future, and we may be faced with attempts of extradition as well;
+  * [[superseding_indictment_-_24-06-2020|the US indictment against Assange]] refers to other people associated with WikiLeaks, so they may also be charged with "espionage" in the US in the future, and we may be faced with attempts of extradition as well;
   * the whole [[superseding_indictment_-_24-06-2020|indictment]] (accusation) against Assange rests on the legal construction of a "conspiracy" ;  the only "legal" way to have a non-US citizen charged under the US charges of espionage, intended to apply to US citizens only. Consequently other people in contact/working with Assange could potentially be part of a maximalist interpretation of such "conspiracy". Another evidence, if one is needed, that the whole case is indeed political?
@@ Line 270: / Line 278: @@
 \\
-\\
-======   ======
 \\
 {{ :street_art:afk_lady-justice-3.jpg?800 |"Lady Justice" by Norwegian street-artist AFK}}