High Court rules that Assange can seek Appeal to Supreme Court
high court report | 05.12.2011 13:25 | Occupy Everywhere | Anti-militarism | Repression | Terror War
Julian Assange was back at the Royal Courts of Justice in London today seeking permission - from the High Court judges who dismissed his appeal against extradition in November - to take his case to the Supreme Court. They haven't actually allowed this, but they're allowing him to ask the Supreme Court directly for leave to appeal, on one of the two points raised.
THE ISSUES AND COURT RULING
The two points on which Assange's case was being made - that there are issues of 'general public importance' - are as follows:
1) Whether a European Arrest Warrant issued by a partisan prosecutor working for the executive (i.e. not an independent judge or investigating magistrate in the civil law system) is a valid Part 1 Warrant issued by a "judicial authority" within the meaning of sections 2(2) & 66 of the Extradition Act 2003?
* This point argues that the decision goes against parliamentary intent in the 2003 Extradition Act (see High Court Ruling).
2) Whether a person in respect of whom no decision to prosecute has been taken can be said to be ’accused’ within the meaning of sections 2(3)(a) of the Extradition Act 2003?
My understanding is that the second of these points was dismissed by the judges, but that they have allowed Assange to try to seek a ruling from the Supreme Court on the first point.
In a rather twisted bit of legal manoevring, the judges refused him leave to appeal themselves, saying although their opinion was that the prosecutor qualified as a 'judicial authority', they accepted that this aspect of the case raised a more general point of public interest which should be settled, so have allowed that he can go and ask the Supreme Court himself if it will hear his appeal. Something like that at any rate.
There's now a fuller explanation under today's news on the home page of the Sweden Versus Assange website:
http://www.swedenversusassange.com/
Julian Assange has 14 days to submit a written application to the Supreme Court.
OUTSIDE THE COURT
An anti-war solidarity vigil was held outside the court from early this morning, organised by London Catholic Worker and Veterans for Peace to keep the focus on the real issues - the truth about the wars as evidenced by the WikiLeaks disclosures Bradley Manning is accused of leaking.
http://wiseupforbradleymanning.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/monday-5-december-solidarity-vigil-for-julian-assange-at-the-high-court-in-london/
Ben Griffin of Veterans for Peace UK spoke about the way the state treats those who dare to speak out and tell the truth about the wars. Ben is himself subject to a High Court gagging order in relation to his experiences in the army. Ben was in the SAS and served in both Iraq and Afghanistan before refusing to go back to war and leaving the army. Prior to the injunction, Ben had spoken publicly about British involvement and complicity in the extraordinary rendition of non-combatants from Iraq and Afghanistan, who were handed over by British troops to the Americans in full knowledge of what would happen to them.
Today, Ben referred to the importance of the WikiLeaks disclosures for soldiers talking about their experiences of the wars, since these revelations provide evidence which confirms stories that the state could otherwise dismiss as unsubstantiated rumour. Ben spoke about the length of time Julian Assange has been fighting this case and has been held under virtual house arrest (nearly one year). He also mentioned Bradley Manning, held for 18 months without trial, for nine of those months in conditions of torture, and Michael Lyons, the British Navy medic jailed for seven months for refusing to take up arms and opposing the war in Afghanistan, whose appeal against this charge and sentence was dismissed by judges after a mere couple of minutes of supposed deliberation. Ben pointed out that anyone who speaks out against the state and its wrongs is likely to be treated in such ways.
Another speaker today referred to the frequent use made by authorities through history of fabricated rape allegations to discredit those who oppose the state or are seen as some kind of threat; this was also referred to by Women Against Rape in a letter to the press almost a year ago, as Assange was beginning his battle against extradition to Sweden:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-rape-allegations-freedom-of-speech
Occupy LSX, which has its own court case here today in connection with its occupation of the UBS Building 'Bank of Ideas', ran a live stream from outside the court all morning.
So, Julian Assange's fight goes on.
For an insight from one of his legal team, see this Democracy Now! interview with Assange's lawyer Gareth Peirce, who has represented and continues to represent many victims of miscarriages of justice:
http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2011/11/1/exclusive_julian_assanges_attorney_gareth_peirce_speaks_about_imminent_british_decision_on_whether_or_not_to_extradite_assange_to_sweden
EXTRACT
AMY GOODMAN: You’re representing Julian Assange, and I wanted to ask how you’ve gone from representing Guantánamo prisoners to representing Julian Assange, as the Swedish government attempts to extradite him from Britain, where you’re based, where Julian Assange is right now, to Sweden.
GARETH PEIRCE: It’s a pretty easy trajectory, I think. If one is to make an equivalency between circumstances, there are individuals, over the decades and the centuries, who stand up to be counted, who are vocal, who do brave things to talk about what is uncomfortable and what others don’t want to hear. And history tells us that those individuals will, by the states who consider their voices should not be heard, be in some way attacked. And it’s part of the narrative that’s perpetuated, the false narrative that makes people an enemy, makes whatever the state remove their protections under due process, because they say, "This is an exception. This is an exceptionalist crime, of such severity that we can—it’s right that we take away what restricts us in confining them." And it’s not a million miles from men who were taken to Guantánamo or men who are being silenced by translating a text from Arabic into English, to people who think the world should know the dark secrets that are hidden and put them out on the internet. These are not enormous differences, but the way the state reacts, whether it’s your state or mine—the way the state reacts is actually identical in each case. It’s to perceive the person as the enemy and try to take them out.
The two points on which Assange's case was being made - that there are issues of 'general public importance' - are as follows:
1) Whether a European Arrest Warrant issued by a partisan prosecutor working for the executive (i.e. not an independent judge or investigating magistrate in the civil law system) is a valid Part 1 Warrant issued by a "judicial authority" within the meaning of sections 2(2) & 66 of the Extradition Act 2003?
* This point argues that the decision goes against parliamentary intent in the 2003 Extradition Act (see High Court Ruling).
2) Whether a person in respect of whom no decision to prosecute has been taken can be said to be ’accused’ within the meaning of sections 2(3)(a) of the Extradition Act 2003?
My understanding is that the second of these points was dismissed by the judges, but that they have allowed Assange to try to seek a ruling from the Supreme Court on the first point.
In a rather twisted bit of legal manoevring, the judges refused him leave to appeal themselves, saying although their opinion was that the prosecutor qualified as a 'judicial authority', they accepted that this aspect of the case raised a more general point of public interest which should be settled, so have allowed that he can go and ask the Supreme Court himself if it will hear his appeal. Something like that at any rate.
There's now a fuller explanation under today's news on the home page of the Sweden Versus Assange website:
http://www.swedenversusassange.com/ Julian Assange has 14 days to submit a written application to the Supreme Court.
OUTSIDE THE COURT
An anti-war solidarity vigil was held outside the court from early this morning, organised by London Catholic Worker and Veterans for Peace to keep the focus on the real issues - the truth about the wars as evidenced by the WikiLeaks disclosures Bradley Manning is accused of leaking.
http://wiseupforbradleymanning.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/monday-5-december-solidarity-vigil-for-julian-assange-at-the-high-court-in-london/ Ben Griffin of Veterans for Peace UK spoke about the way the state treats those who dare to speak out and tell the truth about the wars. Ben is himself subject to a High Court gagging order in relation to his experiences in the army. Ben was in the SAS and served in both Iraq and Afghanistan before refusing to go back to war and leaving the army. Prior to the injunction, Ben had spoken publicly about British involvement and complicity in the extraordinary rendition of non-combatants from Iraq and Afghanistan, who were handed over by British troops to the Americans in full knowledge of what would happen to them.
Today, Ben referred to the importance of the WikiLeaks disclosures for soldiers talking about their experiences of the wars, since these revelations provide evidence which confirms stories that the state could otherwise dismiss as unsubstantiated rumour. Ben spoke about the length of time Julian Assange has been fighting this case and has been held under virtual house arrest (nearly one year). He also mentioned Bradley Manning, held for 18 months without trial, for nine of those months in conditions of torture, and Michael Lyons, the British Navy medic jailed for seven months for refusing to take up arms and opposing the war in Afghanistan, whose appeal against this charge and sentence was dismissed by judges after a mere couple of minutes of supposed deliberation. Ben pointed out that anyone who speaks out against the state and its wrongs is likely to be treated in such ways.
Another speaker today referred to the frequent use made by authorities through history of fabricated rape allegations to discredit those who oppose the state or are seen as some kind of threat; this was also referred to by Women Against Rape in a letter to the press almost a year ago, as Assange was beginning his battle against extradition to Sweden:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/08/wikileaks-rape-allegations-freedom-of-speech Occupy LSX, which has its own court case here today in connection with its occupation of the UBS Building 'Bank of Ideas', ran a live stream from outside the court all morning.
So, Julian Assange's fight goes on.
For an insight from one of his legal team, see this Democracy Now! interview with Assange's lawyer Gareth Peirce, who has represented and continues to represent many victims of miscarriages of justice:
http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2011/11/1/exclusive_julian_assanges_attorney_gareth_peirce_speaks_about_imminent_british_decision_on_whether_or_not_to_extradite_assange_to_sweden EXTRACT
AMY GOODMAN: You’re representing Julian Assange, and I wanted to ask how you’ve gone from representing Guantánamo prisoners to representing Julian Assange, as the Swedish government attempts to extradite him from Britain, where you’re based, where Julian Assange is right now, to Sweden.
GARETH PEIRCE: It’s a pretty easy trajectory, I think. If one is to make an equivalency between circumstances, there are individuals, over the decades and the centuries, who stand up to be counted, who are vocal, who do brave things to talk about what is uncomfortable and what others don’t want to hear. And history tells us that those individuals will, by the states who consider their voices should not be heard, be in some way attacked. And it’s part of the narrative that’s perpetuated, the false narrative that makes people an enemy, makes whatever the state remove their protections under due process, because they say, "This is an exception. This is an exceptionalist crime, of such severity that we can—it’s right that we take away what restricts us in confining them." And it’s not a million miles from men who were taken to Guantánamo or men who are being silenced by translating a text from Arabic into English, to people who think the world should know the dark secrets that are hidden and put them out on the internet. These are not enormous differences, but the way the state reacts, whether it’s your state or mine—the way the state reacts is actually identical in each case. It’s to perceive the person as the enemy and try to take them out.
high court report
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
Parliamentary debate and vote on extradition arrangements today
05.12.2011 17:05
More information can be found on the government's parliament.uk website, including the report of the Human Rights Joint Committee on extradition policy and, this evening, live coverage of the debate.
extradition watch
The Anti-Fascist Fighters World War II, Set Liberation as ending aggressive war
06.12.2011 04:34
He further says that is is the supreme international crime whether Germany does it or the U.S.A. does it. That is the law internationally around the world.
It is plain to see in this regard that Julian Assange has obeyed world international law in exposing the worlds' worst supreme international crimes, while using the content of the liberation side of a free press that gives jounalism as truthfull reporting of all those reckless International law breakers, who are committing the 'Supreme International Crime' of Aggressive War on the Planet Earth.
Far from being a criminal he is a journalist of the highest technical quality, and upholding the fighters of the anti-fascist side for the lliberation of a world based on exposing falsity, and doing so with truth and justice of his practice.
Further it is the liberation side that upholds the need to restore the matriarchy by electing woman equally (Gender Parity as the World Trade Unions discribes) and that the charges against him are fraudulent, and bent on entrapping this activist into the criminal justice system. That is as the U.S. and other Western criminal justice systems do with activists, to remove them for life from bringing forward the need to win the unity and struggle for womans' liberation that has been and continues to be a necessary part of the liberation program of the anti-war movement.
This movement is part of the anti-fascist side designating the dismantling of the War Machine, and its manufactury so that a fuller freedom can come into being than now exists in the Western World. This belief is held by Julian Assange and every person trying to implement equality in some way, but the western world for unjust reasons has disallowed full liberation of the man, woman question by refusing women to be elected equally, politically, economically, judicially, medically, culturally, and religio-wise, instead blaming the un equal and therefore unjust relation between man and women on the individuals who are the victims of 'sexist society'.
Without gender parity the alienated conditon of the man woman question continues to the endangerment of the species well-beingness. Six over kill of the planet in stockpiles is said to be the content of a hurried response on the question, which is caused by 'Male domination of the democracy and freedom', and was first put in place by the Empires of the world.
Six overkill shows, indeed the specie is threatened with extinction by the discredited axis powers military methods of 1) might makes right, 2) Unilateralism, 3) Pre-emptive strikes contained in the hidden messages which Julian Assange brings to the light of the world.
When there is genius combined with technlogical knowhow comes amongst us, for all the correct purposes of changing the world favourably, we must not make the mistaken judgement of locking it away and suppressing it.
Germany tried that and it caused great harm throughout the world. The U.S.A. has just repealed the posse comitus law of 1876 which dissallowed the U.S. military to police and arrest and imprison U.S. Citizens. That is in efect nullifiing the U.S. Constitution, which is sworn to protect U.S. Citizens.
What is happening is a huge step backward at a time when the vast majority of American Citizens are organizing to end the inequitable distributution of wealth (OWS), and to end the foreign policy of aggressive war, and bring the liberation from militarism and gunboat diplomacy to an end, shows fear by the war making ruling circles of the laws that allow the freedom of assembly and speech that the OWs and occupiers globally are using along with the anti-war positions that julian Assange upholds and supports actively. On top of that Julian Assange's life has been threatened and therefore it would not be justice to send him to Sweden, as that country has a vicious right-wing extremist class in power that sides with the U.S. Imperialist wars of aggression. They have been seeking to criminalize his dissent and send him to the U.s.A. Exposing war crimes is not a crime. He must be set free.
He is innocent in the eyes of all who support liberation and freedom of Speech and truthful journalism. To convict him of a crime is to support all that has proven worst in juriprudence. Free Julian Assange and Bradely Manning. Both men are the true heroes of the new free press and truthers movement. 1st cdn. div. says that.
Union Jack
no mistake
06.12.2011 07:07
That's no mistake. It's quite deliberate.
as it is
On being a relative of Morris
07.12.2011 20:03
Make no mistake has made an insight fully deserved, and I have found that Marxism-Leninism is a science that does appreciate constructive criticism., as it makes us ever more concious. Being Canadian and related to W. Morris, I sometime wonder on the Moro of the revolution, just where Britain now stands on the time of the revolution.
Never doubting that it will come as the class relations of the former society become a hinderence to the new society that needs to be born unto the world. However to be ever vilgilent is needed more than ever now, because the moro is upon us and it is a global necessity for the change to real socialism and away from calling social-imperialism as socialism.
Nomenclature or lingo is all important, and in my hurry to do some articles and comments I find that my vilgilence is sometimes wanting. Good heads up on not making any mistakes.
My side of the familly comes from the deep mines, and like a canary I notice sometimes that I have not fully done enough proof reading and hence to mispelling. However make no mistake should be a theme now, and the red guards of the movement are a deep and wide necessity to our comming victories, because security as well, and populism are essentially pressing us, and we cannot drop our guard and lose the knowledge of our times by carelessness. Better get dictionaries and a thesaurus at the hospital thrift shop.
The Imperialist-Camp is preparing the worst possible events for us, and it means as Marx says that they have failed to understand the mistakes of the past, and are bent on making them over again.
We in the new revolution have done our homework and summed up the matter-in-motion most correctly, and so the paths to liberation can and should be continued upon, all the while remembering that we are kinder and more just than the 'old Regime' that makes aggressive war crimes, and pollutes mother nature beyond natures possibilities to sustain the planets life anymore.
Viva socialist liberation. End polllution wars, not endless wars for more and more polllution. Re-tool to the renewables. Restore the matriarchy. Agricultural organic Communes not prisons. You have a world to win.
Union Jack