Ariel Plotnik
Julian Assange, who is imprisoned in a maximum security prison in London, England, called Belmarsh, is scheduled to receive an announcement from the United Kingdom’s Home Secretary, Priti Patel, regarding his request to quash a summons for extradition to the United States of America on charges originally filed on March 6, 2018 but later amended on April 11th, 2019. The charges allege Assange conspired to facilitate whistleblower Chelsea Manning’s acquisition of classified information for dissemination. On May 23, 2019, the Department of Justice (DOJ) superseded its indictment with charges for 17 new counts of a violation of the Espionage Act.
The Espionage Act is unconstitutional for its preclusion of provisions mandated by the Supreme Law of the Land. In the Constitution of the United States of America, Amendment VI states: “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.” Although the provision requires “an impartial jury” of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, the Espionage Act forbids a defendant from impanelling a jury, let alone an impartial one, all the while precluding him or her from engagement in the compulsory process for defenses such as those that may arise from expert testimony on what a public interest is. It is clear that the Espionage Act is therefore illegal.
In the words of criminal and civil rights lawyer Robert Boyle, who described Assange’s extradition hearing as operating “without adherence to the technical and evidential rules of criminal trials,” the grand jury is “fertile ground for prosecutorial abuse.” There is no reason to think that Julian Assange is to be the subject of what one might reasonably describe as a trial where he may enjoy any of his rights whatsoever. The decision to charge Assange is an attack on the guarantee to protect freedom of speech under First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
Since his expulsion from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, England on April 11th, 2019 (i.e., the same day that the United States amended its original complaint), Assange became the subject of a thinly veiled attempt to subvert England’s system of justice into an instrument of bureaucratic cruelty. Although originally sentenced to no more than 50 weeks in prison for a violation of the Bail Act, Assange’s original sentence is already well overdue. After being subjected to extensive delays throughout the process of review at trial, appellate or Supreme Court, Assange continues to languish in Belmarsh.
Within the next few days, Patel is set to make a decision on the U.S.A.’s extradition request within days from now. Patel must now decide whether the US’s request for Assange meets remaining legal tests, including but not limited to a promise not to execute him.
Extradition to the United States of America is equivalent to a death sentence for Assange. Upon conviction for any of the crimes in the standing indictment, Assange would be transferred to a United States Penitentiary, Administrative Maximum Facility (USP Florence ADMAX), an American federal prison in Fremont County near Florence, Colorado.
In an open letter to Patel on June 10th, 2022 more than 300 hundred medical professionals are calling for Julian Assange’s release. At the letter’s start, the authors, noting widening concern for Julian Assange’s health, write how “[they] number more than 300” medical doctors, psychiatrists, and psychologists from around the world, a significant increase from the 60 who signed a similar letter less than three years ago on November 22nd, 2019.
The authors state: “Predictably, Mr Assange’s health has since continued to deteriorate in your custody. In October 2021, Mr Assange suffered a “mini-stroke”. This dangerous deterioration of Mr Assange’s health underscores the medical concern that the chronic stress caused by his harsh prison conditions, as well as his justified fear of the conditions that he would face in the case of extradition, leaves Mr Assange vulnerable to cardiovascular events. This dramatic deterioration of Mr Assange’s health has not yet been considered in his extradition proceedings. The US assurances accepted by the High Court, therefore, which would form the basis of any extradition approval, are founded upon outdated medical information, rendering them obsolete. Under conditions in which the UK legal system has failed to take Mr Assange’s current health status into account, no valid decision to approve his extradition may be made, by you or anyone else. Should he come to harm in the US under these circumstances it is you, Home Secretary, who will be left holding the responsibility for that negligent outcome. The extradition of a person with such compromised health, moreover, is medically and ethically unacceptable.”
At the close of the letter to Patel, the authors describe how valuable a contribution to mankind Assange is, requesting the Home Secretary to refrain from “[complicity] in the slow-motion execution of this award-winning journalist, arguably the foremost publisher of our time. Do not extradite Julian Assange; free him.”
TweetDoctors’ orders:
— Doctors for Assange (@Doctors4Assange) June 13, 2022
“Do not extradite Julian Assange”
Our letter to @PritiPatelhttps://t.co/Lxmb1Ug529 pic.twitter.com/poE42S50H0
Julian Assange’s significance cannot be understated. It is important to emphasize that Julian Assange’s contribution to mankind is of world historical significance not just to the freedom of speech, journalism, or his exposition of ungodly crimes against humanity committed by the United States of America. His significance is his unflinching commitment to oppose the suppression of the freedom of speech, no matter what the cost, no matter how many years of lost life, no matter how deteriorated his health becomes, how far from his family he is separated, nor how terribly alienated from the pursuit of happiness he may be. Julian Assange’s decision to quash the summons for his extradition is nothing short of heroic.
The Left Opposition recommends readers who sympathize, seek to declare, or aim to assemble workers into assemblies, to support Julian Assange’s struggle against oppression for the sake of the freedom of speech. The Left Opposition urges its readers to join the call for Assange’s release. Free Julian Assange!