Julian Assange's Extradition to US Delayed by UK Court Ruling

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has avoided immediate extradition to the United States. The High Court in London has requested more assurances from the US before proceeding.

US authorities claim that Assange, aged 52, endangered lives by releasing confidential military documents. They have been trying to extradite him for espionage charges for a long time.

At a recent two-day hearing, Assange requested permission to appeal the UK's decision to extradite him in 2022. He claimed that the charges against him were politically driven and that he wouldn't get a fair trial.

In a decision announced on Tuesday, a panel of two judges stated that Assange, who is Australian, won't be extradited right away. They gave the US three weeks to provide guarantees regarding Assange's First Amendment rights and assurance that he wouldn't be sentenced to death.

If the US does not provide the necessary documents, Assange will have the opportunity to appeal his extradition in a hearing scheduled for May. This ruling could be a game-changer for Assange, who gained worldwide attention for exposing what he called "convincing evidence of war crimes" committed by US-led coalition and Iraqi government forces.

Julian Assange gestures while speaking to the media from the balcony of the Ecuadorian Embassy on May 19, 2017 in London.

Julian Assange gestures while speaking to the media from the balcony of the Ecuadorian Embassy on May 19, 2017 in London.

Jack Taylor/Getty Images

Related article

Julian Assange makes last-ditch attempt in UK court to avoid extradition to the US

Assange has been resisting extradition for the past five years while held in London's Belmarsh prison. Before that, he spent seven years as a political refugee at the Ecuadorian embassy in the UK capital.

His situation has drawn criticism from supporters of free speech who believe that his extradition could set a dangerous precedent and restrict press freedoms.

The court announced on Tuesday that Assange has a good chance of succeeding on three out of the nine appeal grounds. These include concerns that his extradition goes against freedom of expression, the possibility of bias against him due to his nationality at trial, and the lack of adequate protection against the death penalty if extradited.

However, the court did not allow him to appeal on the basis that the prosecution is politically motivated. According to the judge, there was no evidence to support Assange's claim that the request for extradition was driven by a desire to prosecute him based on his political beliefs.

The judge considered the evidence that the CIA had planned to kidnap Assange from the Ecuadorian Embassy. However, the judge ultimately decided that this was not relevant to the extradition proceedings.

Nick Vamos, who is the head of business crime at Peters & Peters law firm and a former head of extradition at the UK’s Crown Prosecution Service, explained to CNN why some of Assange’s arguments were not taken into account.

He mentioned that Assange was not facing prosecution for journalism or revealing serious State crimes. Instead, he was being charged for hacking and releasing the identities of sources who were put at risk. In other words, journalists cannot avoid legal consequences for criminal actions just because those actions are part of their journalistic work.

Vamos expressed his belief that the US should have no trouble giving the necessary assurances to the court for Assange's extradition. He mentioned that assuring that Assange will not be subjected to the death penalty is a simple task. Additionally, he explained that guaranteeing protection under the First Amendment is more of a strategic consideration during the trial.

Stella Assange, Assange's wife, speaks to the media after Tuesday's ruling in London.

Stella Assange, Assange's wife, speaks to the media after Tuesday's ruling in London.

Toby Melville/Reuters

Stella Assange, Assange’s wife, told reporters outside the court after its ruling that her husband is a “political prisoner.”

She believes that the charges against him are merely a way to punish him for revealing the truth about the war crimes committed by the country seeking his extradition.

She urged the Biden administration to dismiss this disgraceful case that should never have been initiated.

Assange is currently wanted by US authorities for releasing secret military documents given to him by Chelsea Manning, a former Army intelligence analyst, in 2010 and 2011.

In 2019, prosecutors in Virginia accused Assange of 18 crimes. These charges include one count of conspiring to hack a computer related to the 2010 disclosure of classified military information acquired through Manning, as well as 17 more charges under the Espionage Act.

The prosecution claims that Assange encouraged Manning to get thousands of unfiltered US diplomatic cables, which could put confidential sources at risk, along with significant reports on Iraq war activities and details about Guantanamo Bay detainees.

If found guilty, Assange could face a maximum sentence of 175 years in prison, with each count carrying a potential 10-year sentence.

Assange was not present at the crucial last-ditch hearing in February as he was too “unwell” to attend, according to one of his lawyers.

Editor's P/S:

The case of Julian Assange highlights the complex intersection of press freedom, national security, and political motivations in the digital age. While the US seeks to hold Assange accountable for allegedly endangering lives by releasing confidential documents, supporters argue that his extradition would set a dangerous precedent for journalists and whistleblowers. The court's decision to grant more time for the US to provide assurances regarding Assange's rights and the lack of a death sentence reflects the gravity of the