Stella Assange: “In Strasbourg so that there will not be another Assange case”

“It is important to determine not only what happened, but also what the consequences are.” Stella Assange doesn’t just look back. Together with Julian Assange And WikiLeaksshe also looks to the future and to the impact of the case on press freedom, now that the US government has been able to claim with Assange’s plea deal – for the first time in American history – that journalists who reveal classified information in public interest documents are an extremely serious crime, and that the United States may seek to extradite and imprison them regardless of their nationality. Il Fatto Quotidiano interviewed Stella Assange in Strasbourg, where the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has just adopted a resolution based on the report of the rapporteur on political prisoners, Thórhildur Sunna Ævarsdóttir.

Can you explain why the resolution matters?

As Julian himself explained during his speech to the committee, he made the decision to choose freedom over unrealizable justice. There was no realistic time for the case to actually reach a conclusion that could bring justice. So he agreed to plead guilty. And what he has found himself guilty of is gathering news, communicating with his source, obtaining information and communicating it to the public: what the US calls “a conspiracy” to obtain and make public national defense information to make. In light of the fact that the Assange case will never be judged by an independent court, it is incredibly important that this report and resolution be drafted by an independent appointee – someone appointed by the Legal Affairs and Human Rights Committee and an expert in this area – is being led. a long investigation, where we spoke to the parties and drew independent conclusions not only about what happened in the past, but about its wider implications for journalism in Europe. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe represents 46 countries, consists of legislators from the Council of Europe area, and the fact that the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights has appointed the rapporteur to investigate, prepare a report and resolution is of the utmost importance. interest. It also means that these 46 countries now have independent analyzes and recommendations on the serious threat that the precedent of Assange’s prosecution and conviction poses to journalism and freedom of information in the European space. One of the most important aspects of this report is its findings in the context of transnational repression, and the way in which Julian was transferred across borders and imprisoned using mutual legal assistance and extradition mechanisms, and One way instrumentalized that Julian was chased and wrongly arrested. In fact, the way he was treated and prosecuted falls within the definition of a political prisoner of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe.

We have seen how the British Members of the Parliamentary Assembly tried to reject the fact that JA’s prosecution and detention were politically motivated. Do you expect that the British authorities will sooner or later open up about their role in the prosecution of Julian Assange?

The greatest failure in Julian’s case was Britain’s inability to enforce his rights. The Council of Europe’s finding that Julian was a political prisoner during the more than five years he was imprisoned at Belmarsh – the most secure prison in Britain – is extremely significant. The case against him, of course, fell under the Espionage Act, which is a political crime; the circumstances surrounding his detention are very clearly politically motivated, and Britain had many options not to be complicit in this political persecution. There were always administrative, formalistic excuses for keeping Julian in prison, but that is not unusual in the case of political imprisonment of dissidents and journalists: there is always a formalistic excuse for their continued detention. It is very important that the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, which emphasizes human rights and the defense of the free press, has rightly identified Julian as a political prisoner, that he meets the definition of a political prisoner. The UK is a member state, so now that Julian is free, it is easier for Britain to actually take some distance and objectively and critically acknowledge its own failure and ensure this never happens again. I think this is the biggest takeaway: this can never happen again, and these failures cannot continue. There should never be another publisher in prison, and it should never be possible for extradition legislation to be abused in this way to silence a publisher and intimidate the press.

We saw Julian calm and articulate. How does he respond to the injustice and persecution he has suffered?

I hesitate to put words into Julian’s mouth. I think anyone who wants to hear Julian himself should go and see his statement before the Committee of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on Legal Affairs and Human Rights. He was very articulate and analytical and expressed concern about the precedent this sets for his case. He asked the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe – and of course those who are legislators in their own countries – to take steps to ensure this never happens again. Julian wanted to use this platform and the solemnity of the event to say that there are of course many cases like his, where a country aggressively persecutes, harasses and sometimes even kidnaps and kills journalists, dissidents and so on, and that those people are often do not have the visibility that he has, which is why he has chosen this forum to address the public for the first time through the committee. The catastrophic inability of the countries involved to enforce his rights must be addressed and corrected. There must be resistance, and that resistance must come from the Council of Europe and its legislators, because there will be no judicial resolution to correct course. So it is now up to this body to ensure that these failures do not occur again.

As the first anniversary of the war in Gaza approaches, Julian Assange has been very vocal in demanding truth and solidarity for the hundreds of journalists murdered in Gaza and Ukraine together. Do you see the resolution as an important step in protecting journalism around the world?

The vote is an important recognition that journalists in Europe are exposed to reprisals of the worst kind, and that the safeguards that exist on paper mean nothing if a state decides to use its resources – which are relatively unlimited – to go after one person to go. Julian spoke about the wars in Ukraine and Gaza and the staggering numbers of journalists who were targeted and killed. Whether in war or peace, attacking journalists perpetuates impunity and prevents the truth from coming to light. Stronger protections benefit all journalists around the world, while weaker protections make them more vulnerable.

Finally, yesterday Julian made some jokes about the fact that he now has a mother-in-law: What is daily life like in the Assange family?

Julian was released very suddenly and we had to start from scratch in Australia. We take each day as it comes and also try to figure out the next steps. This is all a process: it’s not easy, but in the grand scheme of things, it’s not challenging compared to what we’ve been through. I think we are adapting very well to the new context, the children are happy and of course we are overjoyed to be together. My mother travels with us to help and care for the children. What’s next? Well, I think the next thing is to focus on Julian’s recovery and getting used to being free again. That is our priority. I think Julian is trying to catch up with the world.

L’articolo Stella Assange: “In Strasbourg, so that there will not be another Assange case,” proviene da Il Fatto Quotidiano.