WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was granted a partial victory Tuesday morning after a British court ruled he cannot be immediately extradited to the United States.
In a 66-page judgment, two judges from London’s High Court agreed to grant Assange a new appeal unless the U.S. government provides assurances that the WikiLeaks founder, an Australian, “is afforded the same First Amendment protections as a United States citizen, and that the death penalty is not imposed.”
If those assurances are filed, Judges Jeremy Johnson and Victoria Sharp “will give the parties an opportunity to make further submission before we make a final decision on the application for leave of appeal.”
If U.S. officials make those submissions, the UK court will hold a hearing on May 20.
“The ruling follows a two-day hearing in the High Court in February, where Assange’s lawyer Edward Fitzgerald said American authorities were seeking to punish him for WikiLeaks’ ‘exposure of criminality on the part of the U.S. government on an unprecedented scale,’ including torture and killings,” The Associated Press reports. “The U.S. government said Assange’s actions went beyond journalism by soliciting, stealing and indiscriminately publishing classified government documents that endangered many people, including Iraqis and Afghans who had helped U.S. forces.”
The court found that Assange had a “real prospect of success” on the following three out of nine grounds for appeal: his extradition is incompatible with the right to freedom of expression; he might be prejudiced on grounds of nationality; and he may receive inadequate protection from the death penalty.
The official WikiLeaks account posted on X that the requested assurances from the U.S. government have been deemed “inherently unreliable” by Amnesty International. BREAKING: Julian Assange may still be extradited to the US in three weeks if US Gov provides "assurances" - previously deemed by Amnesty as "inherently unreliable" - including that he will not be prejudiced at trial by reason of his nationality and not receive the death penalty… pic.twitter.com/H90vu00oV8
— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) March 26, 2024
Assange’s wife, Stella, was also critical of the dependability of such assurances.
"U.S. assurances are not worth the paper that they are written on,” she said during a press conference after the ruling. “The United States, of course, is a country that has plotted to assassinate and kidnap Julian, a publisher, in order to silence him.” Stella Assange going off:
"US assurances are not worth the paper they are written on... The US and the CIA were hatching plans. Pompeo told his workers at the CIA to elaborate plans on how to kill Julian. This was all under the Trump administration." pic.twitter.com/2lMTAnCGD5
— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) March 26, 2024
“Assange has been imprisoned for almost five years in the U.K., and spent many years before that avoiding U.K. authorities by holing himself up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London,” CBS News reports. “If extradited to the U.S., Assange faces a potential 175 years in prison for publishing classified information about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq on the WikiLeaks website.”
Ahead of today’s decision, reports surfaced suggesting that the U.S. Department of Justice was considering a possible plea deal for Assange, which could finally bring an end to his arduous legal journey that began over a decade ago.
According to unnamed sources who spoke with the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), officials within the DOJ are considering allowing Assange to plead guilty to a reduced charge of mishandling classified information.
The U.S. indictment charges Assange with 17 counts under the Espionage Act, a move that some observers argue could criminalize common practices in investigative journalism.
The allegations suggest that Assange conspired with Chelsea Manning, a former U.S. Army intelligence analyst, to hack into U.S. military databases, which led to the publication of sensitive documents that exposed military and diplomatic secrets.
This case has raised profound questions about the balance between national security and freedom of the press. Assange and his supporters argue that his actions were those of a journalist exposing governmental wrongdoings and deserving of protection under the First Amendment. Critics, however, see him as a threat to national security, accusing him of recklessly endangering lives through the mass release of classified documents.
Sources told WSJ that Justice Department officials and Assange’s lawyers have taken part in preliminary discussions in recent months over what a plea deal might look like.
Any deal would require approval “at the highest levels of the Justice Department,” WSJ reported.
Adrian Norman contributed to this report
