Pilger writes: "After five years of fighting to clear his name - having been
smeared relentlessly yet charged with no crime - Julian Assange is closer to
justice and vindication, and perhaps freedom, than at any time since he was
arrested."
Julian Assange speaking from the balcony of the Ecuadorian embassy in
London. (photo: Dominic Lipinski/PA)
Freeing Julian Assange: The Final Chapter
By John Pilger, CounterPunch
05 February 16
One of the epic miscarriages of justice of our time is unravelling. The
United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention - - the international
tribunal that adjudicates and decides whether governments comply with their
human rights obligations - has ruled that Julian Assange has been detained
unlawfully by Britain and Sweden.
After five years of fighting to clear his name - having been smeared
relentlessly yet charged with no crime - Assange is closer to justice and
vindication, and perhaps freedom, than at any time since he was arrested and
held in London under a European Extradition Warrant, itself now discredited
by Parliament.
The UN Working Group bases its judgements on the European Convention on
Human Rights and three other treaties that are binding on all its
signatories. Both Britain and Sweden participated in the 16-month long UN
investigation and submitted evidence and defended their position before the
tribunal. It would fly contemptuously in the face of international law if
they did not comply with the judgment and allow Assange to leave the refuge
granted him by the Ecuadorean government in its London embassy.
In previous, celebrated cases ruled upon by the Working Group - Aung Sang
Suu Kyi in Burma, imprisoned opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim in Malaysia,
detained Washington Post journalist Jason Rezaian in Iran, both Britain and
Sweden have given support to the tribunal. The difference now is that
Assange's persecution and confinement endures in the heart of London.
The Assange case has never been primarily about allegations of sexual
misconduct in Sweden - where the Stockholm Chief Prosecutor, Eva Finne,
dismissed the case, saying, "I don't believe there is any reason to suspect
that he has committed rape", and one of the women involved accused the
police of fabricating evidence and "railroading" her, protesting she "did
not want to accuse JA of anything" - and a second prosecutor mysteriously
re-opened the case after political intervention, then stalled it.
The Assange case is rooted across the Atlantic in Pentagon-dominated
Washington, obsessed with pursuing and prosecuting whistleblowers,
especially Assange for having exposed, in WikiLeaks, US capital crimes in
Afghanistan and Iraq: the wholesale killing of civilians and a contempt for
sovereignty and international law. None of this truth-telling is illegal
under the US Constitution. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack
Obama, a professor of constitutional law, lauded whistleblowers as "part of
a healthy democracy [and they] must be protected from reprisal".
Obama, the betrayer, has since prosecuted more whistleblowers than all the
US presidents combined. The courageous Chelsea Manning is serving 35 years
in prison, having been tortured during her long pre-trial detention.
The prospect of a similar fate has hung over Assange like a Damocles sword.
According to documents released by Edward Snowden, Assange is on a "Manhunt
target list". Vice-President Joe Biden has called him a "cyber terrorist".
In Alexandra, Virginia, a secret grand jury has attempted to concoct a crime
for which Assange can be prosecuted in a court. Even though he is not an
American, he is currently being fitted up with an espionage law dredged up
from a century ago when it was used to silence conscientious objectors
during the First World War; the Espionage Act has provisions of both life
imprisonment and the death penalty.
Assange's ability to defend himself in this Kafkaesque world has been
handicapped by the US declaring his case a state secret. A federal court has
blocked the release of all information about what is known as the "national
security" investigation of WikiLeaks.
The supporting act in this charade has been played by the second Swedish
prosecutor, Marianne Ny. Until recently, Ny had refused to comply with a
routine European procedure that required her to travel to London to question
Assange and so advance the case that James Catlin, one of Assange's
barristers, called "a laughing stock . it's as if they make it up as they go
along". Indeed, even before Assange had left Sweden for London in 2010,
Marianne Ny made no attempt to question him. In the years since, she has
never properly explained, even to her own judicial authorities, why she has
not completed the case she so enthusiastically re-ignited - just as the she
has never explained why she has refused to give Assange a guarantee that he
will not be extradited on to the US under a secret arrangement agreed
between Stockholm and Washington. In 2010, the Independent in London
revealed that the two governments had discussed Assange's onward
extradition.
Then there is tiny, brave Ecuador. One of the reasons Ecuador granted Julian
Assange political asylum was that his own government, in Australia, had
offered him none of the help to which he had a legal right and so abandoned
him. Australia's collusion with the United States against its own citizen is
evident in leaked documents; no more faithful vassals has America than the
obeisant politicians of the Antipodes.
Four years ago, in Sydney, I spent several hours with the Liberal Member of
the Federal Parliament, Malcolm Turnbull. We discussed the threats to
Assange and their wider implications for freedom of speech and justice, and
why Australia was obliged to stand by him. Turnbull is now the Prime
Minister of Australia and, as I write, is attending an international
conference on Syria hosted the Cameron government - about 15 minutes' cab
ride from the room that Julian Assange has occupied for three and a half
years in the small Ecuadorean embassy just along from Harrod's. The Syria
connection is relevant if unreported; it was WikiLeaks that revealed that
the United States had long planned to overthrow the Assad government in
Syria. Today, as he meets and greets, Prime Minister Turnbull has an
opportunity to contribute a modicum of purpose and truth to the conference
by speaking up for his unjustly imprisoned compatriot, for whom he showed
such concern when we met. All he need do is quote the judgement of the UN
Working Party on Arbitrary Detention. Will he reclaim this shred of
Australia's reputation in the decent world?
What is certain is that the decent world owes much to Julian Assange. He
told us how indecent power behaves in secret, how it lies and manipulates
and engages in great acts of violence, sustaining wars that kill and maim
and turn millions into the refugees now in the news. Telling us this truth
alone earns Assange his freedom, whereas justice is his right.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not valid.
Julian Assange speaking from the balcony of the Ecuadorian embassy in
London. (photo: Dominic Lipinski/PA)
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/05/freeing-julian-assange-the-final-chap
ter/http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/05/freeing-julian-assange-the-final-
chapter/
Freeing Julian Assange: The Final Chapter
By John Pilger, CounterPunch
05 February 16
ne of the epic miscarriages of justice of our time is unravelling. The
United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention - - the international
tribunal that adjudicates and decides whether governments comply with their
human rights obligations - has ruled that Julian Assange has been detained
unlawfully by Britain and Sweden.
After five years of fighting to clear his name - having been smeared
relentlessly yet charged with no crime - Assange is closer to justice and
vindication, and perhaps freedom, than at any time since he was arrested and
held in London under a European Extradition Warrant, itself now discredited
by Parliament.
The UN Working Group bases its judgements on the European Convention on
Human Rights and three other treaties that are binding on all its
signatories. Both Britain and Sweden participated in the 16-month long UN
investigation and submitted evidence and defended their position before the
tribunal. It would fly contemptuously in the face of international law if
they did not comply with the judgment and allow Assange to leave the refuge
granted him by the Ecuadorean government in its London embassy.
In previous, celebrated cases ruled upon by the Working Group - Aung Sang
Suu Kyi in Burma, imprisoned opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim in Malaysia,
detained Washington Post journalist Jason Rezaian in Iran, both Britain and
Sweden have given support to the tribunal. The difference now is that
Assange's persecution and confinement endures in the heart of London.
The Assange case has never been primarily about allegations of sexual
misconduct in Sweden - where the Stockholm Chief Prosecutor, Eva Finne,
dismissed the case, saying, "I don't believe there is any reason to suspect
that he has committed rape", and one of the women involved accused the
police of fabricating evidence and "railroading" her, protesting she "did
not want to accuse JA of anything" - and a second prosecutor mysteriously
re-opened the case after political intervention, then stalled it.
The Assange case is rooted across the Atlantic in Pentagon-dominated
Washington, obsessed with pursuing and prosecuting whistleblowers,
especially Assange for having exposed, in WikiLeaks, US capital crimes in
Afghanistan and Iraq: the wholesale killing of civilians and a contempt for
sovereignty and international law. None of this truth-telling is illegal
under the US Constitution. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack
Obama, a professor of constitutional law, lauded whistleblowers as "part of
a healthy democracy [and they] must be protected from reprisal".
Obama, the betrayer, has since prosecuted more whistleblowers than all the
US presidents combined. The courageous Chelsea Manning is serving 35 years
in prison, having been tortured during her long pre-trial detention.
The prospect of a similar fate has hung over Assange like a Damocles sword.
According to documents released by Edward Snowden, Assange is on a "Manhunt
target list". Vice-President Joe Biden has called him a "cyber terrorist".
In Alexandra, Virginia, a secret grand jury has attempted to concoct a crime
for which Assange can be prosecuted in a court. Even though he is not an
American, he is currently being fitted up with an espionage law dredged up
from a century ago when it was used to silence conscientious objectors
during the First World War; the Espionage Act has provisions of both life
imprisonment and the death penalty.
Assange's ability to defend himself in this Kafkaesque world has been
handicapped by the US declaring his case a state secret. A federal court has
blocked the release of all information about what is known as the "national
security" investigation of WikiLeaks.
The supporting act in this charade has been played by the second Swedish
prosecutor, Marianne Ny. Until recently, Ny had refused to comply with a
routine European procedure that required her to travel to London to question
Assange and so advance the case that James Catlin, one of Assange's
barristers, called "a laughing stock . it's as if they make it up as they go
along". Indeed, even before Assange had left Sweden for London in 2010,
Marianne Ny made no attempt to question him. In the years since, she has
never properly explained, even to her own judicial authorities, why she has
not completed the case she so enthusiastically re-ignited - just as the she
has never explained why she has refused to give Assange a guarantee that he
will not be extradited on to the US under a secret arrangement agreed
between Stockholm and Washington. In 2010, the Independent in London
revealed that the two governments had discussed Assange's onward
extradition.
Then there is tiny, brave Ecuador. One of the reasons Ecuador granted Julian
Assange political asylum was that his own government, in Australia, had
offered him none of the help to which he had a legal right and so abandoned
him. Australia's collusion with the United States against its own citizen is
evident in leaked documents; no more faithful vassals has America than the
obeisant politicians of the Antipodes.
Four years ago, in Sydney, I spent several hours with the Liberal Member of
the Federal Parliament, Malcolm Turnbull. We discussed the threats to
Assange and their wider implications for freedom of speech and justice, and
why Australia was obliged to stand by him. Turnbull is now the Prime
Minister of Australia and, as I write, is attending an international
conference on Syria hosted the Cameron government - about 15 minutes' cab
ride from the room that Julian Assange has occupied for three and a half
years in the small Ecuadorean embassy just along from Harrod's. The Syria
connection is relevant if unreported; it was WikiLeaks that revealed that
the United States had long planned to overthrow the Assad government in
Syria. Today, as he meets and greets, Prime Minister Turnbull has an
opportunity to contribute a modicum of purpose and truth to the conference
by speaking up for his unjustly imprisoned compatriot, for whom he showed
such concern when we met. All he need do is quote the judgement of the UN
Working Party on Arbitrary Detention. Will he reclaim this shred of
Australia's reputation in the decent world?
What is certain is that the decent world owes much to Julian Assange. He
told us how indecent power behaves in secret, how it lies and manipulates
and engages in great acts of violence, sustaining wars that kill and maim
and turn millions into the refugees now in the news. Telling us this truth
alone earns Assange his freedom, whereas justice is his right.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
