UK court approves extradition of Julian Assange to US, decision with home secretary Patel
www.wsws.org
According to the Extradition Act (2003) which governs the process, Assange now has four weeks (to May 18) to make representations to Patel before her decision is announced.

A British judge has ordered the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States, where he faces a 175-year sentence. The final decision on Assange’s extradition will now be made by U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel. Amnesty International’s Simon Crowther spoke outside the courthouse prior to today’s ruling.

Simon Crowther: “Julian Assange is being prosecuted for espionage for publishing sensitive material that was classified. And if he is extradited to the U.S. for this, all journalists around the world are going to have to look over their shoulder, because within their own jurisdiction, if they publish something that the U.S. considers to be classified, they will face the risk of being extradited.”

  • @pingveno
    -9•2 years ago

    That charge of hacking is a very real charge. Journalists are supposed to not get their hands dirty. Sources give them documents, end of story. Assange was helping Manning attempt a privilege escalation attack on a system so that she could gain access to more documents. He crossed the red line, so I have no qualms with him getting bitten there. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

    The other charges are definitely more concerning in that they could erode press freedom. But then again, actual journalists would know how to aim for the powerful while redacting information that will get innocent people killed. So concerning, but I don’t see an actual journalist running afoul of this. Certainly not someone who reacts to getting people killed with essentially “not my problem”.

    • Joe BidetOPA
      8•2 years ago

      1/ journalists do that ALL THE TIME. you protect your source but you are not prevented from asking for more documents

      2/ he didnt help escalate anythig. She gave him a hash and he never replied about whether or not it got cracked to anything

      3/ it wasn’t even privilege escalation, but allegedly to mask traces, to login from another user. so it would have amounted to helping a source protect herself, if it had been done.

      “no qualms” for a journalist facing extradition in a country he is not even a citizen of, for “espionnage”, for revealing war crimes… i wonder what you then have “qualms” about…