[ad_1]
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange cannot be extradited to the United States, an Old Bailey judge said.
Judge Vanessa Baraitser said she had rejected his extradition for fear that he could take his own life.
The US government said it would appeal the decision.
Assange’s supporters were delighted with the decision not to extradite him, but were unhappy that the decision was made on health grounds.
US prosecutors charged Assange with 17 counts of espionage and one count of computer misuse for WikiLeaks’ publication of leaked military and diplomatic documents in 2010.
The 49-year-old Australian activist was arrested again in September on the charges, which carry a maximum sentence of 175 years in prison.
The indictment claims that he conspired with Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to crack an encrypted password for a classified US Department of Defense computer.
Protesters protesting in front of the Old Bailey in September
The charges also offer more details on the alleged hacking conspirators that Assange and his WikiLeaks colleagues are said to have recruited.
Assange denies conspiring with Manning to crack an encrypted password on the computers of the US Department of Defense, and claims that there is no evidence that anyone’s safety was at risk.
He appeared at the Old Bailey on Monday where Judge Baraitser delivered her sentence.
His attorneys argued that he was acting as a journalist and that he is entitled to First Amendment protections of free speech for publishing leaked documents exposing the wrongdoings of the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But the judge rejected these claims, saying that his conduct “would therefore amount to crimes in this jurisdiction that would not be protected by his right to freedom of expression.”
It added that Assange was suffering from clinical depression that would be compounded by the isolation he would likely face in a US prison, adding that he had the “intellect and determination” to evade any suicide prevention measures that authorities might take.
WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson described the case as “a historic, large-scale attack on free speech.”
Assange’s fiancee, Stella Moris, with whom he has two young children, was at the Old Bailey for the hearing.
Julian Assange photographed with his partner Stella Moris
The Freedom of the Press Foundation, a US non-profit organization, tweeted: “The case against Julian Assange is the most dangerous threat to American press freedom in decades. It is a great relief to anyone who cares. for the rights of journalists “.
“The extradition request was not decided on press freedom grounds; rather, the judge basically ruled that the US prison system was too repressive to extradite. However, the result will protect journalists everywhere.”
Fidel Narváez, who worked in the Ecuadorian embassy most of the time Assange lived there, said: “Keep in mind that freedom of expression is still under attack; if it weren’t for Julian’s health, he would be extradited.”
Michelle Stanistreet, general secretary of the National Union of Journalists (NUJ), said the ruling was “worrying” and left open the possibility that future US governments take a similar approach.
Meanwhile, former shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott said the decision not to allow extradition was an “excellent decision by the British judge.”
“Congratulations to all the tenacious activists on behalf of Assange,” he tweeted.
His mother Christine urged the United States not to appeal the ruling, saying that her son had “suffered enough.”
A bond hearing is expected shortly.
Analysis: It is a mixed result for those who had campaigned against Assange’s extradition
By Dominic Waghorn, Diplomatic Editor
For much of the judge’s ruling, as the court read, it did not look good for Julian Assange.
US prosecutors, he said, met the tests for him to be extradited. He had to decide whether the alleged crimes for which he is wanted in the United States could lead to a trial in Britain if he had committed them here. She seemed to think they could.
But it was the reputation of America’s supermax prison system that appears to have saved Assange from extradition.
Near total isolation would not be good for his mental health and the United States would be unable to prevent him from taking his own life, he decided.
His lawyers say he suffers from depression and has injured himself and said it was very likely that he would end up in a supermax.
So it’s a mixed result for those who campaigned against Assange’s extradition. On the one hand it stays here.
On the other hand, if the United States had more humane prisons, there were many reasons to send him there seemed to be the essence of the ruling.
The Assange case has been obscured by all manner of distractions. The original sexual allegations brought against him by Sweden, his extraordinary self-imposed incarceration in the Ecuadorian embassy, not to mention his eccentric, volatile and volatile personality.
But at the heart of the case against him was the simple question: was he an editor, a journalist, and a war crimes whistleblower or a spy and a hacker?
The British judge ruled that Assange’s activity with Chelsea Manning “went beyond the mere encouragement of a journalist.” That will put off Assange supporters and the free speech activist and may encourage US prosecutors to continue their efforts to extradite him.
They now have two weeks to appeal. The judge’s decision saves Interior Minister Priti Patel from a politically sensitive decision, at least for now. She will have the final say in Assange’s extradition if an appeal is successful.
