revenge
US refuses to say it won’t kill Assange
Wikileaks journalist remains imprisoned as US continues to pursue discredited extradition case – and refusal to give binding guarantee would result in his immediate release if UK justice system was fit for purpose
The US has refused to give a specific, binding guarantee to a UK court that it will not execute journalist and Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. Assange has been held for years in solitary confinement in Belmarsh prison while he fights the US government’s attempt to extradite him so it can imprison him for years beyond his lifespan, after Assange exposed war crimes in Iraq by the US military.
The case should have been laughed out of court three years ago, when the main US witness admitted he had been lying all along in his claim that Assange induced him to hack US systems. Instead, Assange has been submitted to what former UN Special Rapporteur on torture Nils Melzer described as sustained psychological torture – and still faces the likelihood of imprisonment for more than a century.
His recent appeal was adjourned to give the US time to affirm properly that it would not kill him if he was extradited, a sick joke when there has been longstanding evidence of US plans to murder him outside the US.
Incredibly, the High Court has refused to admit fresh evidence of CIA plots to kidnap or kill Julian Assange.
The judges say the rationale for kidnapping or killing Assange would be removed if he is extradited, and the evidence is thus not worth consideration.
Read that again. pic.twitter.com/PqwJIg4yAn— Declassified UK (@declassifiedUK) March 26, 2024
The judges even refused to admit fresh evidence of the US’s plans to assassinate Assange, instead offering the US another opportunity to have him in their hands if they would promise not to put him to death. The US.
But Assange’s wife Stella has revealed that the US has refused to say that it will not kill him and has offered only a boilerplate statement about the death penalty, while denying Assange the free speech protections it would offer to any US citizen:
The United States has issued a non-assurance in relation to the First Amendment, and a standard assurance in relation to the death penalty.
It makes no undertaking to withdraw the prosecution’s previous assertion that Julian has no First Amendment rights because he is not a U.S citizen. Instead, the US has limited itself to blatant weasel words claiming that Julian can “seek to raise” the First Amendment if extradited.
The diplomatic note does nothing to relieve our family’s extreme distress about his future – his grim expectation of spending the rest of his life in isolation in US prison for publishing award-winning journalism.
The Biden Administration must drop this dangerous prosecution before it is too late.
The US statement says the death penalty will be ‘neither sought nor imposed’, but this is non-binding and meaningless given its previous attempts to kill him. The refusal to guarantee there will be no death penalty in Assange’s specific case should mean under UK and European human rights laws that the extradition is immediately refused by the UK court and Assange should already be free. Even if the assurances had been given, the likelihood that the US’s treatment of Assange would lead to his death should be enough to quash the bid.
The fact that he is not yet free of the threat of extradition, let alone walking around in the freedom he should have, is a damning indictment of the state of UK justice and democracy.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
‘Sharon Graham told him to tell me there was no place for me in the future of Unite’
Irish union legend who supported rival in general secretary election tells tribunal he was sidelined on return from cancer battle and never had a positive day at work since he returned – and that he was told that union’s general secretary ‘recognises loyalty’ from those who supported her in election
Irish union legend Brendan Ogle, his wife Mandy la Combre (in beret) and supporters leaving the Workplace Relations Committee today
Today saw an explosive – and often fiery – day in Irish union legend Brendan Ogle’s case against Unite at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) in Dublin.
Ogle, who supported Graham’s rival Howard Beckett for general secretary, and is claiming that the union discriminated against him by sidelining him from his role as senior officer after his return from a battle against life-threatening neck cancer, told the WRC adjudicator that he was ‘reeling’ when he returned and found that his job – which he had been promised would be held for him to return to if he beat the disease – had disappeared and that Unite was trying to move him into a makeweight job that required only three days work a month.
And in the day’s most explosive testimony, he told the court that he had been called to a meeting with Tom Fitzgerald, another senior Irish Unite figure, only to be told that there was no place for him in the union’s future and that:
he’d been told by Sharon Graham to draw up a strategic plan for the Republic of Ireland and I was not to be in it.
Ogle added that the union’s then-assistant general secretary Gail Cartmail had told him that Graham is:
very loyal to [Irish] regional officers who had supported her but many hadn’t… Sharon operates on the basis of loyalty.
This comment raised the obvious question of what Ms Graham does with those who did not support her and how this bears on the treatment Ogle said he was subjected to by the union management.
Unite’s barrister Mark Harty – whose wife Karyn is part of the team from Dentons, one of the world’s most expensive law firms, hired by Graham to represent Unite in this tribunal and in Ogle’s defamation lawsuit against her, Unite and her ally Tony Woodhouse – insisted that Fitzgerald, who still works for the union, would testify he had not said what Ogle reported. However, the authenticity of Ogle’s submission of a photo of a whiteboard layout said to have been sketched by Fitzgerald to show how the union would organise after his departure does not appear to be contested by Unite.
Ogle spoke harrowingly of his fight against cancer and its effects on him and went on to say that after his return – expecting to come back to a job held open for him on the promise of Graham’s predecessor Len McCluskey – that he had not had a single positive day at work. He also described how he applied for a regional secretary job as a means of resolving the issue, only to find on his arrival for interview in London that the interview panel was being chaired by Woodhouse, one of the figures who he says defamed him during a talk at Unite’s biennial Irish conference.
Barrister Harty’s aggressive approach and frequent interruptions of Ogle’s attempts to answer led to numerous confrontations with Ogle’s legal team and a fiery sidebar meeting in a separate room marked by shouting and a walk-out by Ogle’s lawyer saying she would not be talked to in that way. Harty had tried to question Ogle about claims that do not form part of the current case and, when challenged about relevance, had insisted that these questions were ‘central’ to Unite’s case. The dispute led to the sidebar meeting – and on the return of the lawyers and adjudicator, he told Ogle,
Mr Ogle, we’re just going to move on
before asking questions on another topic.
Harty also at one point – appearing to think this was some kind of trump card – demanded to know why Ogle had not told his wife Mandy la Combre to remove social media posts criticising Unite’s treatment of him. The exchange prompted one observer later to observe,
He was basically asking him, ‘Why didn’t you control your wife?’
Harty also appeared to imply that Unite was doing Ogle a favour by moving him to a less senior role in Dundalk after an occupational health report said Ogle was fit to return to his ‘senior officer’ role, because Ogle’s doctor had warned stress might be bad for his health. Ogle responded that the occupational health report was specific to him working in Dublin. Ogle lives in Dublin, but travelling to work in Dundalk involves a daily 100-mile round-trip.
Ogle also told the court that Unite Ireland’s lawyer had told him that the Dundalk role of ‘education and legal’ involved only a day or two’s work – and added that the education part of the role needed only a day’s work because union education in Ireland is not funded by employers in the way it is in the UK, leaving him effectively sent fifty miles away for just three days’ work a month. Unite’s barrister tried to have this evidence ruled out as hearsay.
Ogle told the tribunal that he had consistently refused to sign any agreement sidelining him to Dundalk, but that the union ‘had acted as if I had signed it’.
The day also featured a heated argument about whether Graham will be subpoena’d to testify in the case, with Ogle’s lawyers insisting that she must be legally required to attend if Unite’s legal team does not call her as a witness. Harty insisted furiously and bizarrely that she is not relevant to the case and may not be ‘amenable’ to subpoena, as if such a legal summons is a matter of whether one feels like being summoned.
Sharon Graham has been heavily criticised among union members and activists in the union – and by more than one Irish politician – for Unite’s treatment of Ogle, one of and perhaps the highest-profile and effective union figures in Ireland. The situation caused such outrage that union members picketed Graham’s long-delayed visit to Dublin, Unite’s Community section condemned it as ‘disgusting’ and a whole sector branch threatened to disaffiliate.
Ogle’s testimony and cross-examination continue tomorrow.
Skwawkbox is in Dublin to cover Ogle vs Unite. If you would like to help cover the costs of the coverage, see options below.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Video: protests for Assange as British justice goes on trial in extradition case
Up to 2,000 gather for ‘last chance’ to stop disgraced US case allowed so far by courts – but system seems stacked against Wikileaks founder, press freedom and public’s right to know
Protestors outside the court on Tuesday
Up to two thousand protesters gathered to demonstrate outside the Royal Courts of Justice today in London, where Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and his legal team are fighting in what may be their last chance to avoid his extradition to the US, where the Biden administration wants to lock him in a high-security prison for the rest of his life for the ‘crime’ of exposing the actions of the US military.
Wikileaks embarrassed the US by revealing the wanton slaughter of Iraqi civilians – and the US wants its vengeance. To the UK’s shame, successive UK governments and courts have been all too eager to let the Americans have their way, despite the US case collapsing in disgrace when its main witness to Assange’s supposed ‘hacking’ of US systems admitted he had been lying the whole time – and plots by senior US officials to assassinate him. The admission should have seen the US laughed out of court, but UK judges granted its request anyway.
Protesters massed to show their solidarity with the Australian journalist, who has been imprisoned in Belmarsh prison since 2019 after a long effective incarceration in the Ecuadorian embassy while the UK and US governments conspired against him and even bugged supposedly sacrosanct meetings with his lawyers:
Wikileaks Editor-in-Chief Kristinn Hrafnsson gave the protest crowd a lunchtime update on the ‘absurd’ proceedings, which kept observers down to a handful despite the importance of the case, preventing even human rights groups from attending:
As with all the hearings so far, the case against Julian Assange appears to be stacked. After the farce of the collapsed US case being granted anyway, Assange’s appeal was denied by a judge with deep security service connections.
In the current case, one of the two judges was a lawyer for the Secret Intelligence Service and the Ministry of Defence, with clearance for access to ‘top secret’ information – and the other judge is the twin sister of right-wing former BBC chair Richard Sharpe, who resigned after an inquiry into his arrangement of an £800,000 loan for Boris Johnson before his appointment.
Activist Steve Price, who represented Skwawkbox at the demo, summarised the day:
On a cold day thousands gathered to lobby the court and raise public awareness of this situation. This morning at the RCJ, the chant of the day was “There’s only one decision – no extradition!” The demo was noisy, very colourful, with a visible but low-key police presence and many passing drivers honking horns in solidarity.
Speakers included three Labour MPs – Richard Burgon, Zara Sultana and Apsana Begum, alongside Chris Hedges, Andrew Feinstein, Stella Assange and Julian’s brother and father, as well as lawyers, Reporters without Borders (RwB) and Wikileaks’ editor-in-chief. John Pilger, the great Australian journalist, was remembered with great affection.
Julian’s brother said the Australian Parliament voted by two thirds criticising the UK and USA and demanding he be released and returned to his home country. Two of the lawyers, as well as RwB noted that this case has enormous implications for freedom of the press globally and there are obvious parallels with how journalists have been deliberately targeted by Israel in Gaza.
The magistrate back in January 2021 decided Julian should be released solely on the grounds that he might kill himself, but this was overturned by the Home Secretary. There are a number of legal grounds his team will advocate for refusing the extradition. He has been detained in Belmarsh (in solitary confinement) for nearly 5 years, spent 7 years before that confined in the Ecuadorian Embassy. His health has deteriorated, it’s a form of torture, they’re slowly killing him. He is believed to be too ill to attend court today?
They want to extradite him for the crime of journalism, for exposing their hypocrisy, their dirty secrets, their war crimes.
Keir Starmer, the ‘human rights lawyer’, as he never tires of reminding everyone, has never spoken in Assange’s defence. As Director of Public Prosecutions, his actions are murky – because the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) destroyed its records of them and destroyed notes of what it destroyed. However, it is known that in the case of another extradition the US wanted – that of autistic hacker Gary McKinnon – Starmer flew in a rage to the US to apologise to his US government contacts as soon as then-PM Theresa May quashed the extradition on humanitarian grounds. The CPS and Sweden also destroyed records of their communications when the CPS was pressuring Sweden to continue to pursue Assange’s extradition there – no doubt a stepping stone to getting him to the US – on discredited rape allegations. Despite the destruction of evidence, it is known that the CPS told Swedish counterparts not to ‘dare’ drop its request and refused Sweden’s offer to come and interview Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy.
Assange’s family and team have asked everyone who can make it to the court to continue demonstrating throughout the duration of the hearing to try to keep up pressure on the authorities. The Establishment’s relentless assault on Julian Assange is a war not just against him, but against press freedom and the right of the public to know what its supposed representatives are doing and to hold them to account.
The UK justice system has a last chance to show it is fit for purpose. If it happens, it looks as though justice will have to be wrung out of it. Absolute solidarity with Julian Assange and all persecuted journalists everywhere.
SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you’d like to help it keep revealing the news as it is and not what the Establishment wants you to hear – and can afford to without hardship – please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep doing its job.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.