{"id":262790,"date":"2024-05-27T12:00:30","date_gmt":"2024-05-27T11:00:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=262790"},"modified":"2024-05-21T05:34:46","modified_gmt":"2024-05-21T04:34:46","slug":"assange-wins-right-to-appeal-on-1st-amendment-issue","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2024\/05\/assange-wins-right-to-appeal-on-1st-amendment-issue\/","title":{"rendered":"Assange Wins Right to Appeal on 1st Amendment Issue"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

Assange supporters crowd in front of Royal Courts of Justice in London on Monday 20 May 2024.\u00a0 (Joe Lauria)<\/p><\/div>\n

The High Court in London ruled today that Julian Assange can appeal his extradition to the U.S. on the grounds that he is being denied his First Amendment rights.\u00a0<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

20 May 2024 <\/em>– The High Court in London today granted Julian Assange the right to appeal the order to extradite him to the United States on the grounds that the U.S. did not satisfy the court that it would allow Assange a First Amendment defense in a U.S. court.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe spent a lot of time listening to the United States putting lipstick on a pig, but the judges didn\u2019t buy it,\u201d Stella Assange told reporters outside the court building. \u201cAs a family we are relieved but how long can this go on? The United States should read the situation and drop the case now.\u201d<\/p>\n

Assange has been imprisoned in London\u2019s notorious Belmarsh Prison for more than five years on remand pending the outcome of his extradition.\u00a0 He must now spend an untold number of more months in the maximum security prison awaiting the start of his appeal.<\/p>\n

In that sense it was a bitter victory for Assange. He gets to stay in prison another year or more, Joe Biden doesn\u2019t have to worry about a journalist showing up in chains in Alexandria, VA during a presidential campaign and of course Assange could lose his appeal and arrive in the U.S. at a more opportune time for Biden.<\/p>\n

In another sense, it was a victory for the supremacy of European law when it comes to free speech,<\/p>\n

Background to Monday\u2019s Action<\/strong><\/p>\n

The High Court in London on March 26 had ruled that Assange had three grounds to appeal, because 1). his extradition was incompatible with his free speech rights enshrined in the European Convention on Human Rights; 2.) that he might be prejudiced because of his nationality (not being given 1st Amendment protection as a non-American) and 3). because he had inadequate protection against the death penalty. (Without such protection Britain cannot extradite him.).<\/p>\n

Rather than proceed with the appeal on those three grounds, the High Court gave the U.S. the chance, fours years after the extradition process began, to promise it would not use the death penalty, and to guarantee his free speech rights.<\/p>\n

Because it is an executive branch decision, the U.S. was able to assure the British government that it would not seek the death penalty, and Assange\u2019s lawyers on Monday said they did not contest that.\u00a0 Left unexplained, however, was why the British home office waited four years to seek what is normally a routine assurance in an extradition case.<\/p>\n

US Loses an Argument<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Gabriel and John Shipton, Julian Assange\u2019s brother and father, arriving to court Monday.<\/p>\n

(Joe Lauria)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The free speech issue was more complicated because a decision about Assange asserting a First Amendment defense at trial will be up to a U.S. federal court and not the Department of Justice. Therefore the DOJ could not issue such an assurance on the free speech issue.<\/p>\n

That ultimately led the two judges, Justice Jeremy Johnson and Victoria Sharp, to allow Assange to launch a formal appeal of his extradition because of an apparent violation of British extradition law, based on the European Convention on Human Rights, that requires the receiving country to allow an extradited person the right to free speech.<\/p>\n

Johnson and Sharp did not buy the convoluted argument of James Lewis KC for the United States, on why the U.S. should get their hands on Assange despite being unable to guarantee his freedom of expression.<\/p>\n

Edward Fitzgerald KC, and Mark Summers KC, barristers for Assange, easily picked apart three pieces of Lewis\u2019 somewhat desperate presentation:<\/p>\n