A UK court has issued an order for Julian Assange to be extradited to the US. this order comes after many years of effective inaction and Mr. Assange’s virtual imprisonment for several years.
Materials collected and leaked by Chelsea Manning, an ex-US Army serviceman, were published by Assange as editor of Wikileaks in 2010. These materials included information regarding serious allegations of US military misconduct during the Iraq war.
Leaked materials also contained videos and other information regarding the deaths of civilians and other actions categorized under international law as war crimes. Very little legal or other action appears to have happened regarding allegations and evidence contained in this information.
An earlier UK court finding ruled against the deportation of Assange. This ruling was overturned by a superior court when the US was given the right to appeal. Assange still has the option to appeal to the High Court regarding the current deportation ruling.
A few legal perspective issues
- Is leaking information regarding war crimes an offense? Against whom? The people killed or the people killing them? The mere fact that the large numbers of deaths are apparently legally worth less than the publication of the information about them deserves some attention.
- The public interest: The public, of whom you have heard occasional mentions, are paying for these wars with their lives and the money of the privileged few who pay taxes. How is publication of this information NOT in the public interest? Are the public paying for unpunished war crimes?
- Security leaks: What security leaks? Allegations at the time of supposed security leaks putting servicepeople at risk don’t seem to have any substance at all, especially over time. Why not?
- Security breaches: Manning, a very low ranking soldier, supposedly collected this vast amount of information over a considerable period of time. To what level of security classifications could he have access? I ask because the exact significance and security status of the leaks needs to be quantified.
- An explanation of how these supposedly serious breaches of security also got no further than prosecuting Manning would also be nice. …Or were they not deserving of investigation for some reason? Because on the face of it, the average local supermarket has or had more security oversight than the US military. Somebody downloads that much information and nobody notices? Come off it.
- Espionage: There is no indication of espionage being conducted by Assange or Manning. No money changed hands, which it usually does in any real espionage environment. There is no reason to believe this information was published for any other reason than in serving the legitimate public interest.
- Double standards 1: If this information had been leaked regarding any other nation, the person leaking and publishers would be considered true patriots. Ironically, they’d also be considered to be providing information for the purpose of justice.
- Double standards 2: The publication of information that relates to war crimes is illegal? How?
- Double standards 3: Information regarding the Wikileaks data was also published by every other news media site on Earth. They’re not guilty of anything? After the fact or not, they’re publishing exactly the same information.
- Double standards 4: Can Assange receive a fair trial in the US? there has been absolutely no presumption of innocence or legal mitigation whatsoever. If so, how can he get a fair trial? Does the US legal system have access to jurors who haven’t read any news in the last 12 years?
… So how are we going with the course of justice?
Not too well, it seems. If reporting and publishing information related to serious breaches of US and international law is illegal, times are tough in the legal profession. Kindly note that most of the significant information published by Wikileaks relates almost entirely to reportable offenses. Personnel are supposed to report such breaches of law under military regulations and international law. Nobody did.
Manning, in effect, did exactly that. Assange published that information. Explain how that’s a crime. You may have to, you know.
_______________________________________________________
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed in this Op-Ed are those of the author. They do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of the Digital Journal or its members.
