3 The World‎ > ‎8 People‎ > ‎My Self‎ > ‎

My Julian Assange Speech

Today, is not just the appeal for Julian Assange, No, there is something far greater that is on trial today. Today, on trial, in this court is the very system of justice its self.

And that is why this is not just a trial of Julian Assange but also a trial of English law.

The Justice System

During the the second world war my father was interned on the Isle of Man simply because he had been raised in Austria and so might possibly have Nazi sympathies. I do not believe he did, but that is neither here nor there, he was a suspect. What is important, is that;

  • he was not put in solitary confinement,
  • he was not water boarded,
  • he was not humiliated in any way.

He and the other prisoners were allowed to arrange concerts and lectures, they were treated with humanity. In Britain and in the US, at that time, we knew, that to be a suspect was not sufficient cause for punishment

After the war even the prominent Nazis of Germany were given a trial. Their voices were heard at Nuremberg.

  • They were not dragged through the streets tied to cars.
  • They did not appear blooded on the front pages of the newspapers.
  • The politicians of the day didn't publicly jeer at them.

We were proud to be different, proud to be civilised.

But today, we have lost that pride? And with it the legitimacy it gave us.

The Cables

After the war In 1944 her Majesty's government in the United Kingdom decided to publish some books called “Documents on British Foreign Policy 1919-39” which they described as “the most important documents in the Foreign Office archives relating to British foreign policy between 1919 and 1939” and let me tell you something about those documents......They included the embassy correspondents of the time. They were the direct equivalent of the embassy cables today.

It is suggested that over a million people had access to the embassy cables including Bradley Manning then age 22 years, which means it was unlikely to be top security information it or means that somebody was negligent. Surely with that kind of exposure any foreign intelligence that wanted the cables, was likely to already have them.

"Vice President Joe Biden said there has been no 'substantive damage' to the United States by Julian Assange in the whole WikiLeaks scandal. He says it has been embarrassing, but you can't prosecute people for embarrassing the United States. If that were true, Joe Biden would be serving life in prison." –Jay Leno

The US intends to prosecute Julian Assange for Sabotage but one witness (Bradley Manning) has been intimidated, one is drugged (Adrian Lamo) and no US judge can withstand Washington's political bias as evidenced by their lack of action on the war crimes revealed by Wikileaks and across the board. Notably it is a human right to release information which is in the public interest.

The US has expressed the intention to extradite Julian Assange from Sweden under the TIAS 10812 the "Supplementary Convention on Extradition between the United States of America and the Kingdom of Sweden" but there is no rule in this convention under which they can do so!

However this is unlikely to be an issue as the US has already illegally extradited many people from Europe and may apply extreme pressure on Sweden in this respect. Illegal extraditions to US must be stopped.

Judging Julian

I do not feel in a position, to judge Julian Assange, in respect of his good or bad conduct with Anna Ardin or Sofia Wilen, I was not there.

And I certainly feel that the matter of their allegations must be taken seriously and judged at some point,

but; I think we all must agree, that the allegations against JA, should not be used by the United States, as a political instrument with which to achieve the unrelated end, of silencing, also those, who expose evidence of war and other crimes.

And I certainly feel that the matter of their alleged war crimes must be taken seriously and judged at some point also.

Law

There is only one question that needs to be asked - “if extradited might Julian Assange be prejudiced at his trial or punished, detained or restricted in his personal liberty by reason of his political opinions.” The answer is undeniably yes, he might well be, and so in accordance with the Extradition Act 2003 Section 13(b) the extradition of Julian Assange must be barred.

It is very important to note that the words are "might be prejudiced" meaning it is only necessary to prove the possibility of prejudice it is not necessary to prove the fact of prejudice.

If this bar is ignored, or over ruled, by the court, what it is saying is that the English legal system will no longer protect individuals from the political persecution by the United States America.

This is a revolution in English Law.

And that is why this is a trial of the English legal system its self.



© Tom de Havas 2011. The information under this section is my own work it may be reproduced without modification but must include this notice.
Comments