BOOM

Trending Searches

    SUPPORT
    BOOM

    Trending News

      • Fact Check 
        • Fast Check
        • Politics
        • Business
        • Entertainment
        • Social
        • Sports
        • World
      • Law
      • Explainers
      • News 
        • All News
      • Decode 
        • Impact
        • Scamcheck
        • Life
        • Voices
      • Media Buddhi 
        • Digital Buddhi
        • Senior Citizens
        • Videos
      • Web Stories
      • BOOM Research
      • BOOM Labs
      • Deepfake Tracker
      • Videos 
        • Facts Neeti
      • Home-icon
        Home
      • About Us-icon
        About Us
      • Authors-icon
        Authors
      • Team-icon
        Team
      • Careers-icon
        Careers
      • Internship-icon
        Internship
      • Contact Us-icon
        Contact Us
      • Methodology-icon
        Methodology
      • Correction Policy-icon
        Correction Policy
      • Non-Partnership Policy-icon
        Non-Partnership Policy
      • Cookie Policy-icon
        Cookie Policy
      • Grievance Redressal-icon
        Grievance Redressal
      • Republishing Guidelines-icon
        Republishing Guidelines
      • Fact Check-icon
        Fact Check
        Fast Check
        Politics
        Business
        Entertainment
        Social
        Sports
        World
      • Law-icon
        Law
      • Explainers-icon
        Explainers
      • News-icon
        News
        All News
      • Decode-icon
        Decode
        Impact
        Scamcheck
        Life
        Voices
      • Media Buddhi-icon
        Media Buddhi
        Digital Buddhi
        Senior Citizens
        Videos
      • Web Stories-icon
        Web Stories
      • BOOM Research-icon
        BOOM Research
      • BOOM Labs-icon
        BOOM Labs
      • Deepfake Tracker-icon
        Deepfake Tracker
      • Videos-icon
        Videos
        Facts Neeti
      Trending Tags
      TRENDING
      • #Operation Sindoor
      • #Pahalgam Terror Attack
      • #Narendra Modi
      • #Rahul Gandhi
      • #Waqf Amendment Bill
      • #Arvind Kejriwal
      • #Deepfake
      • #Artificial Intelligence
      • Home
      • News
      • What Comes Next After Julian...
      News

      What Comes Next After Julian Assange's Release?

      Even after Assange walks free after pleading guilty, issues such as the relationship between the US Espionage Act and the First Amendment, and the potential for prosecuting journalists under espionage charges, remain unresolved.

      By - The Conversation |
      Published -  26 Jun 2024 3:26 PM IST
    • Boomlive
      What Comes Next After Julian Assanges Release?

      Holly Cullen, The University of Western Australia

      Today Julian Assange walked out of the Federal Court Building in Saipan, North Marianas Islands, a free man. He pleaded guilty to one count of breaching the US Espionage Act.

      With the court accepting his 62 months already spent in Belmarsh Prison as a sufficient sentence, he has no more case to answer, and no more sentence to serve.

      However, this case leaves behind it a trail of unanswered legal questions and unresolved controversies. In particular, there are questions of fundamental human rights that can only now be addressed in future cases, if ever.

      Also Read:AI Overtakes Real Images of War: What do Palestinian Journalists Say?


      Can freedom of speech concerns stop extradition?

      Once Assange had formally pleaded guilty, the US government’s lawyers announced they would immediately withdraw the request to extradite Assange from the UK.

      That means the appeal that would have been heard later this year will not go ahead.

      To recap, in May the UK High Court gave Assange the right to appeal the UK Home Secretary’s order for his extradition. This was granted on two grounds, both related to free speech.

      The first ground of appeal accepted by the court was that extradition would be incompatible with Assange’s right to freedom of expression, as guaranteed in the European Convention on Human Rights.

      The second ground, related to the first, is that he would be discriminated against on the basis of his nationality because he could, as a non-citizen of the US, be unable to rely on First Amendment freedom of speech rights.

      But as this appeal is no longer proceeding, the issue of whether a threat to the accused’s freedom of expression can stop extradition will therefore not be argued or decided. The European Court of Human Rights and other human rights bodies have never addressed this point. It’s unlikely to arise again soon.

      Also Read:2024 Elections Report: Fake Polls, Cheap Voice Clones, Communal Claims Go Viral

      An espionage precedent?

      Also on freedom of expression, the relationship between the US Espionage Act and the First Amendment of the US Constitution remains an open question.

      In today’s pleadings, Assange and the US government took different views on whether the exercise of freedom of expression should constitute an exception to the offences under the Espionage Act. Nonetheless, Assange accepted that no existing US case law established such an exception.

      This leads to the question of whether today’s guilty plea establishes a precedent for prosecuting journalists for espionage.

      In the strict legal meaning of precedent in common law, which refers to a binding judicial interpretation, it does not.

      The judge made no determination on whether Assange or the US government was legally correct. However, the US government can now point to this case as an example of securing a conviction against a journalist under the Espionage Act.

      The question of how much a non-national of the US can rely on the First Amendment likewise continues to be on the table. This issue would also have been addressed in the extradition appeal, as a question of whether Assange would be discriminated against on the basis of his nationality.

      Also Read:India's Use Of AI In Elections Offers Insights For Global Democracies

      Detention or confinement?

      Finally, today’s hearing revived the question of whether the time Assange spent in the Ecuadorian embassy between 2012 and 2019 counts as detention.

      As the judge moved to determine whether the sentence of “time served” was a sufficient penalty for his offence, the US government insisted the judge could only consider the 62 months in Belmarsh.

      Assange’s lawyers argued he had been detained for 14 years, including the period claiming asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy. In 2016, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found Assange was arbitrarily detained in the embassy, largely because of the disproportionate length of time between his initial arrest and the date of the working group’s opinion, over five years.

      The UK and Sweden both rejected the working group’s findings, which they do not regard as binding. Furthermore, the findings went beyond the established case law on arbitrary detention, which usually focus on issues of legality and fair process rather than duration. Only the dissenting member of the Working Group analysed the impact of Assange’s voluntary conduct on the length of his stay in the embassy.

      In today’s hearing, the judge referred to Assange’s “14-year ordeal” but accepted the time in Belmarsh alone was sufficient penalty. The judge considered this period, just over five years, comparable to the seven years served by Chelsea Manning, who had provided the documents to Assange.

      It is also worth noting that Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, speaking on ABC Radio National, described Assange as “confined” in the Ecuadorian embassy, avoiding the legally significant term “detained”.

      The legal status of Assange’s period in the embassy therefore remains ambiguous, despite the UN Working Group’s 2016 findings.

      Today, the main story is that Assange no longer faces prosecution for espionage and is now free to return to his family. However, some of the legal issues emerging from this case remain tantalisingly unresolved.The Conversation

      Holly Cullen, Adjunct Professor in Law, The University of Western Australia

      This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

      Also Read:Why Many Young Voters Believe In Self Censorship On The Internet


      Tags

      Julian AssangeUSAextraditionUK
      Read Full Article
      Next Story
      Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
      Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker. Please reload after ad blocker is disabled.
      X

      Subscribe to BOOM Newsletters

      👉 No spam, no paywall — but verified insights.

      Please enter a Email Address
      Subscribe for free!

      Stay Ahead of Misinformation!

      Please enter a Email Address
      Subscribe Now🛡️ 100% Privacy Protected | No Spam, Just Facts
      By subscribing, you agree with the Terms & conditions and Privacy Policy connected to the offer

      Thank you for subscribing!

      You’re now part of the BOOM community.

      Or, Subscribe to receive latest news via email
      Subscribed Successfully...
      Copy HTMLHTML is copied!
      There's no data to copy!