14 Julian Assange - 10 years later, how did we get here? Molly Steele

This research was completed as part of the Churcher’s to Campus (C2C) courses

Molly Steele Upper Sixth

Julian Assange and his cat (officially known as Embassy Cat on Twitter)

In 2010, the founder of WikiLeaks Julian Assange, was involved in what is considered one of the largest releases of unauthorised information in history. In the ten years since the event, he and his company have become wrapped in controversy; his supporters argue that his work is for the public interest, whereas his critics argue his work undermines national security. Having faced two extradition requests (one from Sweden, one from the US), and spent nearly seven years in London’s Ecuadorian embassy, Assange still has not faced trial in the US for his involvement in the 2010 WikiLeaks Scandal. WikiLeaks has continued to release private or unauthorised documents and information, including significant Vatican documents and the emails of Hillary Clinton.

The 2010 WikiLeaks Scandal During the late part of 2009, Chelsea Manning, a US army intelligence analyst, contacted WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange with the intention of releasing classified information about the US government and armed forces to the public. In February 2010, WikiLeaks published a diplomatic cable from the US embassy in Iceland, marking the flood of classified information and documents that would go on to be considered the largest release of unauthorised information in history (Ray, 2020).

This included over 250,000 embassy cables, war-related activity reports for Afghanistan and Iraq (90,000 and 400,000 reports respectively), 800 Guantanamo Bay detainee assessment briefs, as well as the contents of several secret-level military and intelligence documents, including CIA detainee interrogation videos and rules of engagement for Iraq and Afghanistan (Terwilliger, 2019). to face trial in the US for 18 counts [see appendix 1], the most serious of which are espionage and theft (BBC News, 2019) (The United States Department of Justice, 2019), which may result in up to 175 years in prison (Presse, 2019).

Many of the cables exposed the darker side of international diplomacy, including the names of Saudi donors who were the biggest financiers of terror groups; conversations in which US officials were being instructed to spy on UN leadership; evidence of Arab leaders privately urging the US to do an airstrike on Iran; and an agreement between Washington and Yemen to cover up the use of US planes to bomb al-Qaida targets (Leigh, 2010). One of the most famous leaks occurred in April 2010, when WikiLeaks released footage of possible US war crimes, whereby US soldiers in a helicopter shot dead 18 civilians in Iraq (BBC News, 2019). Amnesty International believes that the charges against Assange should be dropped: the non-governmental organisation believes that the act of publicising disclosed documents should not be punishable as it “mirrors the conduct that investigative journalists undertake regularly in their professional capacity” (Amnesty International, 2020).

Mike Pompeo, the US Secretary of State who previously served as CIA Director, believes it is time to “call out WikiLeaks for what it really is – a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia” and attorney-general Jeff Sessions announced that Assange’s arrest was a priority (BBC News, 2017).

The US Department of Justice argues that the leaks not only threatened the national security of the US but also noted the significant danger this put many individuals in: the leaks included the names of human sources for US intelligence, including local Afghans and Iraqis, journalists, religious leaders, human rights advocates and political dissidents from repressive regimes (The United States Department of Justice, 2019).

However, during the 2016 US election race, Donald Trump praised WikiLeaks following the release of the Democratic National Committee emails, including those of Hillary Clinton. Furthermore, Assange claims that Trump offered Many of the cables exposed to grant him clemency if he denied WikiLeaks had links to Russia (Borger & the darker side of international Bowcott, 2020). Evidence has also been released by the FBI that suggests diplomacy. Roger Stone, a political strategist and associate of Donald Trump, exchanged private messages with Assange whereby he offered to support Assange if he was tried in the US (Goodwin, 2020).

Manning was arrested in May 2010, and in July 2013 was sentenced to 35 years in prison for multiple charges, including espionage and theft (Ray, 2020). After the Swedish government issued a request to extradite Assange in 2010, he claimed diplomatic immunity in 2012, and for nearly seven years remained in London’s Ecuadorian embassy. In April 2019, this right was revoked and he was arrested; he was then sentenced in May for breaching his bail conditions (Taylor, 2019). Assange is in Belmarsh Prison in the UK, and is yet Assange’s UK trial started in February this year, but has yet to progress beyond the first hearing due to coronavirus (Holden, 2020).

A Summary of Events There are four strands to Julian Assange’s story: the WikiLeaks Scandal and repercussions with US government (red), Sweden and its two charges against Assange for sexual molestation and rape (purple), Assange’s relationship with

Ecuador (green), and how the UK courts have dealt with prosecuting him (blue).

The table below will be useful to reference throughout this essay, and provides the

context for what is to be discussed. For the purpose of this essay, the focus will largely be on the Assange and the Ecuadorian embassy, as well as the fallout of the WikiLeaks scandal. seeking asylum (BBC News, 2013). Julian Assange was seeking diplomatic asylum in 2012, after being granted bail by the UK Supreme Court as it decided on Sweden’s request to extradite him. Assange believed

2010 February WikiLeaks release unauthorised files of US government August Swedish Prosecutor’s Office issues a European Arrest Warrant for Assange December Assange is arrested in London, then granted bail

2012 May UK Supreme Court rules Assange should be extradited to Sweden June Assange requests diplomatic asylum from Ecuador, and enters its embassy August Ecuador grants Assange diplomatic asylum

2015 August Swedish prosecutors drop investigation into sexual molestation: they ran out of time to question him

2017 May Sweden’s Director of Public Prosecutions announced the drop of the rape investigation

2019 April Ecuador removes Assange’s right to diplomatic asylum Metropolitan Police enter Ecuadorian embassy and detain Assange May US files 18 charges against Assange in a superseding indictment Assange is sentenced to 50 weeks in Belmarsh Prison for breaching bail conditions Sweden reopens investigation into sexual assault June Formal extradition request from the US for Assange July Home Secretary Sajid Javid signs US extradition request, sending case to the courts November Sweden discontinues investigation into rape allegation

2020 February First hearing for extradition request occurred in Woolwich Crown Court for a week May Second hearing is cancelled due to coronavirus Despite this debate, Assange was able to claim diplomatic asylum and remain in the embassy without being arrested by the British authorities: under international law, it is illegal for the UK to enter the Ecuadorian embassy and remove Assange, as it would be an infringement of Ecuador’s state sovereignty.

However, after 6 years and 10 months of asylum, Ecuadorian President Lenín Moreno announced the termination of Assange’s right to diplomatic asylum. This was the result of his “discourteous and aggressive behaviour”, his “hostile and threatening declaring of its allied organisation, against Ecuador” and “the transgression of international treaties”. Assange is accused of having blocked security cameras, gained access to security files of the embassy without permission, and having threatened the government of Ecuador by trying to challenge them legally three times in regards to his treatment in the embassy (Moreno, 2019). He was given multiple warnings by the Ecuadorian government, in particular in regards to mistreatment of the guards, which a few months prior resulted in the removal of his security, as well as in regards to the conditions in which he kept his living space, with great concerns for his pet cat [see appendix 2]. (BBC News, 2018)

(BBC News, 2019) (BBC News, 2019) (Holden, 2020) (Taylor, 2019)

that if he was to be extradited to Sweden, he would then be extradited to the US: even though the US had not submitted an extradition request at this time, there had been significant backlash from the US in regards to his involvement in the 2010 Assange, Diplomatic Immunity, and The WikiLeaks Scandal, leading him to believe Ecuadorian Embassy that his political activity put his safety at An embassy is a diplomatic post that is risk and his life in imminent danger. considered the territory of a foreign nation, with the ability to offer refuge to those Ecuador recognises the right to grant Ultimately, the legal reason for Ecuador diplomatic asylum, which is enshrined in terminating Assange’s diplomatic immunity the Caracas Convention on Diplomatic was due to a series of acts that violated Asylum (1954). The Ecuadorian government both the Havana Convention on Asylum granted Assange’s request for diplomatic (1928) and the Caracas Convention on asylum in August 2012: even though Article Diplomatic Asylum (1954). Article 2, section 3 of the convention states that it is “not 5 of Havana states that “while enjoying lawful to grant asylum to persons who, asylum, refugees shall not be allowed to at the time of requesting it, are under perform acts contrary to the public peace” indictment or on trial for common offences (Anon., 1928). Furthermore, the Caracas … or have not served the respective Convention states that anyone in asylum sentence” (UN - Treaty Series, 2014). cannot interfere in the internal politics of the territorial state (Vecoso, 2019).

This was a controversial move by the Ecuadorian government: they believed that Assange faced a situation that meant to him an imminent danger, whereas the British authorities feared Assange was using diplomatic asylum as a way to escape “the regular process of the courts” (Värk, 2012). The majority of Assange’s work with WikiLeaks meddles with the internal affairs of other states by releasing sensitive information that may disrupt internal politics. An example of this occurred in 2019, when WikiLeaks released Vatican documents which exposed alleged

Chelsea Manning

corruption in the Catholic Church; key members of WikiLeaks visited Assange before and after this and multiple sources have stated that Assange still works for them (Moreno, 2019). This highlights Assange’s breach of international treaties, as well as his failure to abide by his promise to the Ecuadorian government to stop working for WikiLeaks.

This resulted in Assange being arrested on 11th April 2019. He was then sentenced to 50 weeks for breaching his bail conditions. (BBC News, 2019)

Julian Assange – What will happen next? British extradition law means that the judge does not have to be provided with evidence that the suspect is guilty or not. Rather it requires the requesting nation, in this case the US, to explain to the UK courts that there is a case that needs answering. This can happen as the UK has a list of countries, including the US, which it believes has laws and safeguards in place that guarantee independent judges and a legal right to a fair trial. (Casciani, 2020)

However, the Extradition Act (2003) bans extraditing anyone to face trial in a country that has the death penalty, unless the requesting nation has promised not to impose it (Houses of Commons, 2003). This means that, if the courts agree to extradite Assange, it will be conditional upon the US agreeing not to impose the death penalty.

Extradition requests also require the consent of the Home Secretary, which was gained in 2019 when Sajid Javid signed off on the request (BBC News, 2019). However, Assange has the ability to appeal against the extradition ruling, meaning hearings could be extended for at least another year. He would be able to appeal up to the UK Supreme Court or the European Court of Human Rights. Although the European Court of Human Rights ruled in 2012 that the allegedly harsh conditions in US prisons do not breach human rights (Casciani, 2020), the Home Secretary, now Priti Patel, has the ability to step in and reverse Sajid Javid’s agreement to the extradition, thereby blocking the court’s decision.

In 2012, Theresa May did just this; she blocked the motion to extradite Gary McKinnon to the US, as she feared the extradition would likely lead to a high risk of him ending his life (he had both Asperger’s and depression) and therefore viewed the extradition request as incompatible with his human rights (BBC News, 2012).

Assange himself is considered by many to have ill health – with 60 doctors from around the world writing an open letter to Priti Patel requesting that she moves Assange out of Belmarsh Prison, and that he undergoes an “urgent expert medical assessment of both his physical and psychological state of health” (Presse, 2019). It is possible that he may be considered too frail, whether physically or mentally, to be able to be tried in the US – therefore giving Priti Patel the ability to block the extradition entirely.

Ultimately, the trial of Julian Assange in the US hinges on the decision of the courts, and the response of the Home Secretary.

Charge Name

1 Conspiracy To Obtain, Receive and Disclose National Defence Information

2-4 Unauthorised Obtaining of National Defence Information Detainee Assessment Briefs, State Department Cables, Iraq Rules of Engagement Files

5-8 Attempted Unauthorised Obtaining and Receiving of National Defence Information Detainee Assessment Briefs, State Department Cables, Iraq Rules of Engagement Files

9-11 Unauthorised Disclosure of National Defence Information Detainee Assessment Briefs, State Department Cables, Iraq Rules of Engagement Files

12-14 Unauthorised Disclosure of National Defence Information Detainee Assessment Briefs, State Department Cables, Iraq Rules of Engagement Files

15-17 Unauthorised Disclosure of National Defence Information

18 Conspiracy To Commit Computer Intrusion Reference Law

18 U.S.C § 793(g)

18 U.S.C § 793 (b) and 2

18 U.S.C § 793 (c) and 2

18 U.S.C § 793 (d) and 2

18 U.S.C § 793 (e) and 2

18 U.S.C § 793 (e)

18 U.S.C §§ 371 and 1030