ASSANGE EXCLUSION CLAUSE

Jude Fleming, Human Rights Defender, Researcher and Writer.

SUMMARY: The UK stacked the deck against Assange like a card shark in a casino. Britain’s Got a Supreme Court Scandal. The UK constructed a loophole in a law on purpose to intentionally exclude Assange from benefitting. Rigged. Illegal. It will kill him. That’s the difference between finding a loophole or engineering a loophole. This article should bring the house of cards down.

Assange came awfully close to death in December (2019). He’s not out of the woods yet, currently locked up under maximum security in Belmarsh prison. He is injured, ill and enduring torture as a target of political revenge. There are days before a crucial US Extradition case Feb. 24th, 2020 but he is virtually in a legal, technological and communication straightjacket along with his lawyers. Assange is facing a death sentence in the United States, anyway you measure it, but cannot mount a full defence. He will never see Australian soil alive; he will be repatriated to Australia in a coffin if he first winds up in U.S. custody. There is no possibility of a fair trial there. He has been forced to remain in UK for 10 years under the ruse that the UK was obliged to enforce a disproportionate, now obsolete, European Arrest Warrant (EAW) from Sweden. Supreme Court cases were being adjourned to entrap him. The outcome has been a catastrophic deprivation of Assange’s fundamental human rights.

My blog (Sept. 2018) outlined corruption by Sweden and the UK. Since then I discovered new emails publicly available on the UK’s CPS site here. The crux of the UK Supreme Court scandal is the principle of “proportionality”as explained in a video here.

The debate over the application of the Assange EAW had “gone into hyperspace” because there were other EAW cases which would be affected. Redux: Assange challenged the proportionality of the extradition law, then the old law was revised. While that challenge was in court, the CPS deliberately backlogged EAW cases in abeyance, then let those persons benefit from the revised law but not Assange; he was excluded.

“The SC (Supreme Court) will know that the outcome will have an impact on numerous current pending EAW cases, no matter what. Cases are being adjourned regularly pending the outcome in Assange.” (Paul Close, CPS)

The UK actually delayed other EAW cases until the Assange matter was (pre-)determined then engineered a phrase to prevent Assange from benefitting. The Assange Exclusion clause limited the application of the revised law to ongoing or pending EAW cases and not those which had concluded/were deemed “valid”. The UK tipped the scales of justice against him with prejudice and discrimination. He is not equal under the law in the UK. Predictably, Assange and his lawyers can expect more injustice, more prejudice and more corruption in order to streamline his illegal exit from the UK to the eager US authorities who have entrapped him extrajudicially and almost killed him.

Britain’s Supreme Court was weaponized to incapacitate Julian Assange. The political interference in the UK Judiciary is the direct cause of his current torture, lack of legal access and due process. The backlog served as a method for punishing Assange before any Swedish charges were laid thus circumventing his access to legally entitled protections. The “Assange exclusion clause” (a term I coined in May 2013) guaranteed that legal standards for him were uniquely inconsistent, biased and disproportionate. When standard operating procedures don’t operate consistently the reason is political as such tactics must have been orchestrated at the highest level of government. When a law changed in Assange’s favour it did not apply to him. A negative outcome was a foregone conclusion. It led to arbitrary detention.

Page 223 of Annex 15 authenticates the @UN’s decision that Assange’s detention is arbitrary. There is absolute certainty that the UK conspired to entrap him. “I should mention that the certified legal point has potentially far reaching consequences for scores of pending cases from, in particular, Estonia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Belgium and Greece.”

The CPS stacked the deck, held “scores” of other extradition cases in abeyance while Assange’s legal challenge to UK extradition laws was in play. The CPS rigged the queue of extraditions to leave him behind, then wrote an exclusion clause which prejudicially targeted Assange. He and his legal team have faced one gross UK injustice after another. The UK has not acted impartially and thus robbed Assange of years of presumed innocence, health, freedom of movement/ speech/ association, and time with his children and family.

UK Supreme Court met informally, in secret, without lawyers, oral arguments and made a pivotal decision against Assange. Irregularities signal political interference. (see left photo)

The entire loophole rested on “proportionality” : see

Assange has no basis to trust UK justice given the UK’s treatment of the EAW. It’s almost certain that US extradition proceedings will escalate to the Supreme Court and he will lose. He’ll be handed over to the US based on a repeated version of “Misrule of Law” and held under Special Administration Measures in a human mausoleum until he dies.

The US Version of “Misrule of Law, Assange Edition” would outshine the UK version with the power and polish of a seasoned, sociopathic military dictator.

It’s clear that Assange’s arbitrary detention has nothing to do with laws, habeas corpus, guilt or innocence or due process but has everything to do with the UK’s subversion of justice. For anyone to say that his incarceration has been self-imposed or that “he could walk out at any time” to “face justice” in light of these emails would be nothing short of delusional. He was kettled by police using a tactic that surrounds and threatens him but publicly claims that he is free to leave. But that’s been the UK government’s carefully constructed myth all along. The UK portrays Assange as evading justice when in fact it thwarted every effort to advance the case; not only for him but for the two Swedish complainants.

For a decade he has suffered conditions of torture, lost income for his publishing and public speaking, precious years with his children and been denied access to urgent medical care. His reputation was obliterated and his support base severely damaged.The UK should be held responsible for these immense losses. He is the only Western journalist held as a political hostage in a supposedly democratic country. The truth is Assange is not a fugitive. He is a mouse in a mouse trap; skilfully designed and set by UK and US authorities. He is a caged person, under tortuous conditions, like an exotic pet or a political trophy. It all comes down to political revenge.

Assange is withstanding exponentially disproportionate punishment for allegations(s) which produced no charges or convictions. If this were a board game, it could be called: “Mis-Rule of Law, the Assange Edition.”

The UK deliberately excluded Julian Assange from benefitting when the UK revised its extradition laws (2014) wherein non-charged persons were presumed innocent and not extraditable. The Assange case was pivotal in bringing about this legal revision yet he was prejudicially excluded. If the revised legal precedent were to have been applied to his case it would have allowed him to leave the UK. Had his case been addressed impartially his EAW case would have been determined based on the new legal precedent which considered proportionality (ie. UK will not extradite an un-charged person to another country especially when other methods of interview are available). Assange is now in a maximum security prison without the tools and access to his legal team to defend himself.

The UK contorted due process, rewrote laws, denied FOIA disclosures and prevented Assange from defending himself in Sweden. The appeal to UK’s Supreme Court had to do with the validity and legal standing of the EAW. Based on the evidence presented above, Assange could have the record corrected and be freed.

Legal remedies for his case were exhausted but were done in such a manner as to undermine his access to justice. Therefore, the case is a political, not simply legal, and Assange is a political prisoner. He is not a “fugitive of justice“, he is a victim of UK abuse of power. Assange had “reasonable cause” to enter Ecuador’s embassy as an asylee because he sought protection from inevitable extradition to the United States with a stop-over in Sweden.

The United Nations condemned Sweden and the UK for Assange’s prolonged arbitrary detention. The UK rejected the UN’s ruling, continues to flout his human rights and due process and insulted the UN’s expert panel. It conflated a minor bail infraction, punished him to maximum security and strategically incapacitated him prior to an historical US prosecution process. Court rulings juxtaposed a “bail infraction” with Assange’s reasonable cause to fear for his life and liberty. It was an effort to reactivate an EAW that was formally withdrawn by Sweden years ago and should have been deemed “invalid” based on the revised law.

In the words of Vivienne Westwood, the UK has abused its judicial powers in a “Mis-Rule of Law”, whereby the UK bent the normal application of law in order to exclude him from justice.

The UK’s consistent tactical approach has been to undermine Assange’s legal and human rights, wage a relentless malicious public relations campaign that put its conduct in a noble light and brands Assange as a cowardly criminal. The histrionic disregard of the United Nations ruling is unpacked in full by Liora Lazarus.

IMPLICATIONS: Legal and Human Rights

Britain’s Supreme Court was weaponized to incapacitate Julian Assange. Political interference in the UK Judiciary is the direct cause of his current torture, lack of legal access and due process. Any condemnation or damage that arises from scrutiny of these emails is well-deserved. The UK’s international reputation and that of Her Majesty’s Government, (HMG) should not be more important than the life of a publisher, journalist and servant of the Global Public.

The UK has been caught in unethical and prejudicial behaviour toward Assange. Emails from Paul Close demonstrate the strategy for forcing Assange to stay in the UK. Delay the case. Prolong detention. Confuse the story. Coordinate press release with Sweden to advance a libellous version of events. Modify and improvise laws on an as-needed basis. Deny Assange any benefits that would logically apply to him after a law is revised. Every legal effort to challenge prejudicial treatment was sabotaged right up to the UK Supreme Court. Look again. Paul Close was quoting a source from higher up in the UK government below:

FURTHER QUESTIONS

Who was involved in the steering of the UK Supreme Court decision? Look at the email addresses in the above email. It was a “whole of government” effort to subvert justice: SOCA, Metropolitan Police in London, and FCO.

How intact is UK justice system? Can anyone trust UK justice now? Certainly not Assange nor his legal team. How far does UK CPS have to deviate from usual application of justice before it is glaringly obvious that it is no longer a legal deadlock but a political one requiring a political solution? It should also signal a pressing need for the UK to return to rule of law, due process, habeas corpus, presumption of innocence and restoration of Assange’s fundamental human rights.

In the battle for information, or control over it, Assange is a prime target for governments who want to restrict the public’s access. The culture of secrecy serves as an invisibility cloak for more abuse of power and corruption. Governments who oppose increased access to information have intentionally and strategically incapacitated Julian Assange for ten years.

ASSESSING PRESENT DANGER:

Assange is at the apex of US revenge operations. His greatest adversary is the US who wants to prosecute him for revealing materials which serve the public good but compromise official secrecy (of governments, corporations and persons). His work empowers ordinary citizens. His work as a journalist, publisher, author and public speaker empowers those who need protection and challenge those with too much power — who then abuse it. The US is a dangerous place for him. There is no limit to its appetite for power and dominance. US revenge fantasies would not be fulfilled were Assange to be killed; in order to exact the concentrated revenge the US Empire wants, it must comprehensively destroy him, his associates and his legacy. It must keep him alive so he can suffer under the full weight and strength of US “justice”. where it is certain his human and legal rights will be abused. The UK’s abuse of power thus far is but a mild foreshadow of what awaits him should he ever be extradited for prosecution in the US.

It is possible that the United States is exerting pressure on countries to cooperate with its goal to get him into custody to face US extradition and prosecution on US soil. The US may claim the “right to hot pursuit” with respect to Assange as a high priority target and coerce nations to manipulate their legal conduct to advance this goal. Based on the information in CPS / SPA emails it is possible that UK is exacting political revenge either independently or in concert with the US. It will go to almost any length to incapacitate Assange despite the fact that he had not been charged with any offence in any country up until May 2019. Let’s not forget the UK almost stormed the embassy to apprehend Assange. It was an overblown reaction given that he absconded bail, it was a police matter and should not have compromised the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic premises.

It has become normalised as an acceptable thing to do. All journalists, bloggers, political and environmental activists and human rights lawyers are put on notice. Just like China.

NEXT STEPS FOR ENSURING JUSTICE FOR ASSANGE

The UK must:

1. Abide by the United Nations decision ruling that Assange is arbitrarily detained. The evidence is irrefutable.
2. Overturn the Supreme Court ruling and deem the EAW invalid. Even though Sweden withdrew it the historical record must be corrected. The UK must rescind the “Assange Exclusion Clause” and apply the revised law. The obvious solution now would be to apply the new law to Assange retrospectively.
3. Stop the US extradition proceedings immediately. The UK is not obliged to enforce a politically motivated legal request from the US which would certainly result in his death. Assange must be released and granted safe passage. At the very least he must able to be granted bail with unimpeded legal and computer access.

4. Compensate a.) Assange, b). Assange’s family, who have suffered financially, physically and psychologically and c).Wikileaks as a media entity and not-for-profit public service publisher.

5. Launch an inquiry into the mishandling or deliberate corruption of the case. It could also probe the waste of the public purse/taxpayer money spent to guard, investigate, litigate and harass Assange. A judicial review is in order.

6. Issue a formal public apology acknowledging corruption, torture and the harm caused. Without a public admission of fault, the reputation of the UK’s justice system will suffer more damage.

7. File formal complaints to professional bodies that oversee the ethics and conduct of its members. Specifically, Paul Close needs to be disbarred from the legal profession. His role in the Assange case should be comprehensively studied and the UK Law Society should have an opportunity to assess the degree of malfeasance in his conduct. The UK should face criminal charges under the Conventions Against Torture which are litigated on an international basis?

8. Oversight: a). The UK’s FOIA needs serious scrutiny. The Information Commission Office (ICO) must be compelled to release more documents pertaining to this case, particularly communications between the UK and the U.S.. If the UK’s is not challenged then the FOIA process is degraded which is counterproductive to its professional purpose. Public authorities are habituating a reflex response of denying access to information which is contrary to genuine public interest. Reputation management concerns should not supersede citizens’ right to access material which is of public concern. b). The UK Supreme Court needs more oversight. Evidence hints that SC decisions were influenced by CPS legal tricks as well as political and foreign influence. c). The UK CPS needs more oversight and persons responsible for unethical behaviour must face criminal consequences. No one is above the law, including UK Prime Ministers.

9. Disclose more documents including communications between the US and 4 other countries (Sweden, UK, Ecuador and Australia). Thus far, the Information Commissioner’s Office has covered it up, withheld the truth and instrumentalized secrecy to detain and now torture Julian Assange. This must end immediately. Persons responsible must be held to account and face criminal charges.

10. Australia must repatriate Assange now. It would be tragic if the only way that Assange could return to his homeland is in a coffin. He deserves a hero’s return.

SUMMARY

There is no doubt that Assange is a political hostage of the UK and the U.S. Global condemnation of the UK’s deliberate, protracted and ongoing misconduct must be unified and unequivocal. Media outlets and human rights organizations must amplify the dangers of this case to prevent it from happening to other journalists, publishers and activists. It is unthinkable that Assange might be extradited to the US predicated on blatant perversion of justice.