Founder of Wikileaks, renowned whistleblower, and champion of accountability, Julian Assange is once again in the headlines. His hearing took place at the High Court of London over America’s extradition proceedings against him under the Espionage Act which is a litmus test for press freedom and democracy. The American quest to have him extradited is ludicrous, given the concerted attempt to depict Assange as a criminal who has divulged state secrets and sensitive information while compromising Washington D.C.’s national security. The truth is that extraditing Assange is nothing short of a brazen attack on freedom of speech, access to information, and credible journalism.

If extradited, Assange would face a sentence of 175 years in prison on American shores. Such a sentence entails that Assange would not survive in solitary confinement which explains why in 2021, the London Magistrate Court halted his extradition. Amnesty International also cautioned that American assurances of Assange being exonerated from solitary confinement carry no credibility given that a non-binding diplomatic note allows the United States to change its position arbitrarily. The recently concluded hearing in February 2024, however, ended with two London High Court judges requesting more time to make a decision on Assange’s extradition. The responses to American requests from human rights organizations to the judiciary clearly demonstrate the controversial nature of the extradition and how that would affect Assange and press freedom. 

He also faces 17 charges under the Espionage Act which is despite the fact that his journalism exposed American war crimes on his illustrious Wikileaks publication. Note further that prior to the Assange extradition request, no journalist has ever been prosecuted under the Espionage Act. As a result, his extradition, which entails an eventual and prolonged incarceration, sets a bad precedent for investigative reporters who continue to unearth harrowing details of American excesses in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan and places such as Guantanamo Bay. The authenticity of his findings is also unquestionable despite the fact that strict action against perpetrators, war criminals, or architects of death and destruction never took place.  

Yet tragically, the founder of Wikileaks remained incarcerated in London after spending years locked up in Ecuador. Notably, however, Assange was never found violating any laws in the United Kingdom, Europe, or his home country, Australia. The absurdity and lack of traction of the American narrative of his status as a criminal explains why the High Court in London sought to buy more time.

Related News

Washington based think tanks advocate war on Lebanon

US losing India to China-Russia bloc, as SCO summit rang alarm bells

There is, however, a more pressing problem that requires immediate attention. The London High Court judges could easily go against Assange. One of them is Jeremy Johnson, a former officer for the MI6. The MI6 is notorious for its close collaboration with the CIA and pressure from Johnson could ensure that Assange ends up being extradited. The CIA’s agenda for holding Assange responsible for ‘violating state secrets’ has an unenviable history. It is exemplified in the former head and US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo planning on kidnapping and killing Assange in 2017.

This reveals the level of American insecurity over credible whistleblowers. Assange’s primary contribution was to expose the vagaries of those championing the war on terror. This includes individuals, groups, and governments infatuated with brazen surveillance of citizens, torture, extrajudicial killings, and imprisonment. Such realities have unfolded in the so-called democratic world order, which is supposed to be governed by social contracts between the electorate and their representatives. Through Wikileaks, however, that notion was exposed as both Edward Snowden and Assange strove to make the general public aware of egregious human rights violations taking place unabatedly from the most powerful country in the world and its allies.

For the United Kingdom to cave in to American pressure and have Assange extradited and trialed under ridiculous conditions would be a travesty for justice. Assange is part of a very prestigious journalistic tradition that dates back to the 1971 leaks when a secret FBI program in the US was found involved in spying on anti-war movements and those questioning American involvement in the Vietnam War. In 2024, the world confronts the reality of Israeli terrorism wreaking havoc on battered, displaced, and occupied Palestinians. Figureheads and champions of freedom such as Assange are desperately needed to expose the fabrications, propaganda, and crass lies that American governments feed to their respective populations and beyond.

Such exposure is precisely why protests have erupted across the world from citizens calling for Assange’s release. The American quest to have him labeled as a criminal and an enemy of the democratic world order has so far miserably failed. The very same American allies are host to numerous communities, human rights activists, and organizations which are calling for American accountability instead of Assange’s own.

While the London High Court’s 2024 decision to buy more time on America’s extradition request is a step in the right direction, his eventual extradition should not take place.

It would be tragic.