Tag Archives: arbitrary detention

Civil Liberties, Featured, Government Accountability, International, US

Julian Assange’s Internet Cut By Ecuadorian Government

Leave a comment

London, UK – In a statement released on Wednesday, the Ecuadorian government confirmed it had cut Assange’s internet communications with the outside world at their London embassy, claiming that his posts on social media put the country’s international relations “at risk.” In addition to Assange’s internet connection being severed, he is also being denied any visitors.

According to NPR, a statement released by Ecuador claimed that “Assange violated a written contract with its government in late 2017, ‘for which he’s obligated not to issue messages that would interfere with relationships with other nations.'” Assange has been living in Ecuador’s embassy for more than five years, in what a UN panel describes as “arbitrary detention,” after seeking asylum from persecution.

A report by the Associated Press explained:

Ecuador granted Assange asylum in the South American nation’s London embassy in 2012, where he has remained cooped up ever since. Ecuador has repeatedly tried to find a solution that would allow Assange to leave without the threat of arrest, but with no success. He remains subject to arrest in Britain for jumping bail and also fears a possible U.S. extradition request based on his leaking of classified State Department documents.

“The government of Ecuador warns that Assange’s behavior, through his messages on social networks, put at risk the country’s good relations with the United Kingdom, the other states of the European Union, and other nations,” the statement read.

On the evening of March 28 Wikileaks offered additional information about the incident and Assange’s current situation, noting that Assange had been ordered by Ecuador to remove a specific tweet that weighed in on the arrest of Carles Puigdemont by German police.

The tweet from Assange reportedly ordered to be removed stated the following:

This is not the first time Ecuador has suspended his internet access. In 2016, he had his internet connection “temporarily restricted” by the Ecuadorian government after WikiLeaks published emails stolen from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager, during her presidential campaign which gave the world a candid view inside of the campaign. Former president Rafael Correa gave Assange asylum after he sought refuge in the embassy and reportedly appreciated his work, but current head of state Lenín Moreno advised Assange to avoid involvement in politics and described him as a hacker, according to the AP.

Assange’s friend, Internet entrepreneur Kim Dotcom, is holding an online vigil being broadcast to You Tube and Facebook Live to “to restore Julian Assange’s human right to freedom of communication,” according to a press release.

Supporters of Julian Assange are currently gathering outside of the Ecuadorian embassy to protest the decision to undermine his human right of communication with the outside world.

The #ReconnectJulian online vigil for Julian Assange is below:

 

Activism, Featured, International, Politics, US

UK Judge Refuses to Revoke Assange Arrest Warrant

Leave a comment

London, United Kingdom— Despite a United Nations panel finding that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is “arbitrarily being detained” and Swedish prosecutors dropping their criminal investigation and request for extradition, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will continue to face arrest if he attempts to leave the Ecuadorian embassy in London, after a UK judge upheld a warrant for breaching his formal bail conditions in the UK. Assange maintains that he was forced to seek political asylum in the embassy to avoid political persecution.

A report by The Guardian noted that Senior district judge Emma Arbuthnot was not swayed by the legal argument put forth by Assange’s legal team that his prosecution was not in the public interest to arrest him for bail jumping. It is worth noting that if there is a secret indictment in the U.S., the pretense of arresting Assange for bail jumping could be used to extradite him to the U.S. to face charges.

“I find arrest is a proportionate response even though Mr. Assange has restricted his own freedom for a number of years,” Arbuthnot stated. “Defendants on bail up and down the country, and requested persons facing extradition, come to court to face the consequences of their own choices. He should have the courage to do the same. It is certainly not against the public interest to proceed.”

The warrant upheld by the judge was due to Assange’s seeking of political asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in 2012, to avoid Sweden’s attempts to extradite him over the investigation into allegations of sexual assault; the allegations were steadfastly denied by Assange and the investigation of the allegations was dropped in May 2017.

It has been suggested in earlier reports that there is a sealed secret grand jury indictment for Assange in the U.S., indicating the posibility that the attempted extradition to Sweden over rape charges, which he had steadfastly denied, were a strategic means of extraditing him to the U.S. by proxy.

Before Tuesday’s hearing, Jennifer Robinson, Assange’s lawyer, Jennifer Robinson, said that U.S. government had clear intentions of prosecuting WikiLeaks.

“The UK FCO [Foreign and Commonwealth Office] refuses to confirm or deny whether there is an extradition request for Mr Assange,” she said. “In our recent FoI challenge against the CPS […] the CPS refused to disclose certain material because it would ‘tip off’ Mr Assange about a possible US extradition request. It is time to acknowledge what the real issue is and has always been in this case: the risk of extradition to the US.”

[RELATED: Julian Assange Calls on British and Swedish Governments to Drop Investigations]

Further revealing the deeply politicized nature of Assange’s detainment, just last month, after being granted citizenship by the Ecuadorian government, Ecuador applied for diplomatic status for the WikiLeaks founder. If awarded diplomat status, Assange could claim diplomatic immunity— which would theoretically grant him legal immunity— thus allowing him to leave the embassy without being arrested. The British Foreign Office turned down the request by Ecuador.

Assange’s lawyers had argued that the warrant should be withdrawn for numerous reasons, including the fact that Sweden was no longer seeking extradition and that arresting him would not be in the public interest or proportionate— noting his six years in the embassy were “adequate, if note severe” enough punishment— citing the UN panel ruling that his detention was “arbitrary.”

The Guardian reports that Assange attorney Mark Summers QC noted attempts by the UK government to maintain Assange’s detention— despite evidence that Sweden requested a withdrawal of the European arrest warrant for Assange— referring specifically to the fact that Sweden in October of 2013 advised Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) lawyers that it was necessary to withdraw the Swedish arrest warrant on grounds of proportionality. It wasn’t until 2017, four years later, that CPS chose to do abide by the request.

Additionally, Summers argued that Assange was justified in seeking refuge in the embassy, as he had a valid fear that US authorities were seeking to arrest him for WikiLeaks’ publication of secret documents.