If British court accepts bizarre theory, any UK journo
could face extradition for publishing U.S. secrets
The U.S. Justice Department is urging a British court to accept a theory that Julian Assange, not being a U.S. person, is not entitled to the Constitution's First Amendment protection of freedom of press, according to the editor of WikiLeaks.
The First Amendment says nothing about U.S. persons -- citizens or aliens residing in the United States -- versus non-U.S. persons. The Amendment says that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." The Amendment says any abridgment of freedom of press is illegal.
U.S. lawyers of course avoided the obvious point that by abridging WikiLeaks' press freedom, the Justice Department also sets a precedent for abridging the press freedom of Americans who wish to read WikiLeaks. Press freedom is not only about freedom to publish. It is also about freedom to consume the product of the press.
The editor, Kristinn Hrafnsson, told Western Advocate that a new affidavit submitted by U.S. government lawyers this week for Assange's upcoming extradition trial takes the position that foreign nationals like Assange are not entitled to press protections under the First Amendment, meaning he is prosecutable for violating the U.S. Espionage Act of 1917 which prohibits dissemination of state secrets. The Justice Department has never prosecuted anyone for publishing secrets, though many have been prosecuted for stealing secrets in order to pass them to a foreign power.
Hrafnsson revealed the development outside Assange's case management hearing at London's Westminster Magistrates Court Thursday, the Advocate said.
"On the one hand they have decided that they can go after journalists wherever they are residing in the world, they have universal jurisdiction, and demand extradition like they are doing by trying to get an Australian national from the UK for publishing that took place outside U.S. borders," he told the Advocate.
The United States was a force behind the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN in 1948. The declaration's Article 19 specifies that press freedom is guaranteed regardless of borders.
The declaration says:
Hence the U.S. argument is a prima facie admission that international law, to which the UK has acceded, must be waived on behalf of U.S. prosecutors. In other words, the U.S. prosecutors have presented proof that a standard of international law is to be voided in order to "get" one individual who has annoyed powerful politicians with his publications.
U.S. theory voids press freedom for Assange
https://www.westernadvocate.com.au/story/6596140/assange-may-not-get-us-press-protection/?cs=12512
could face extradition for publishing U.S. secrets
The U.S. Justice Department is urging a British court to accept a theory that Julian Assange, not being a U.S. person, is not entitled to the Constitution's First Amendment protection of freedom of press, according to the editor of WikiLeaks.
The First Amendment says nothing about U.S. persons -- citizens or aliens residing in the United States -- versus non-U.S. persons. The Amendment says that "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..." The Amendment says any abridgment of freedom of press is illegal.
U.S. lawyers of course avoided the obvious point that by abridging WikiLeaks' press freedom, the Justice Department also sets a precedent for abridging the press freedom of Americans who wish to read WikiLeaks. Press freedom is not only about freedom to publish. It is also about freedom to consume the product of the press.
The editor, Kristinn Hrafnsson, told Western Advocate that a new affidavit submitted by U.S. government lawyers this week for Assange's upcoming extradition trial takes the position that foreign nationals like Assange are not entitled to press protections under the First Amendment, meaning he is prosecutable for violating the U.S. Espionage Act of 1917 which prohibits dissemination of state secrets. The Justice Department has never prosecuted anyone for publishing secrets, though many have been prosecuted for stealing secrets in order to pass them to a foreign power.
Hrafnsson revealed the development outside Assange's case management hearing at London's Westminster Magistrates Court Thursday, the Advocate said.
"On the one hand they have decided that they can go after journalists wherever they are residing in the world, they have universal jurisdiction, and demand extradition like they are doing by trying to get an Australian national from the UK for publishing that took place outside U.S. borders," he told the Advocate.
The United States was a force behind the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN in 1948. The declaration's Article 19 specifies that press freedom is guaranteed regardless of borders.
The declaration says:
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.As the UN press freedom declaration is regarded as the international norm, the U.S. theory that only U.S. persons are assured of press freedom violates a standard of international law. The UK of course was also a promoter of the international press rights declaration.
Hence the U.S. argument is a prima facie admission that international law, to which the UK has acceded, must be waived on behalf of U.S. prosecutors. In other words, the U.S. prosecutors have presented proof that a standard of international law is to be voided in order to "get" one individual who has annoyed powerful politicians with his publications.
U.S. theory voids press freedom for Assange
https://www.westernadvocate.com.au/story/6596140/assange-may-not-get-us-press-protection/?cs=12512
No comments:
Post a Comment