The British judiciary has not issued a ruling this Wednesday on the extradition of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to the United States after a two-day hearing at the High Court in England and Wales. Judges postponed a final decision for several days, hearing both defense and prosecution arguments about potential violations of the journalist’s freedom of speech and the political motives behind the extradition. Assange, who could not attend either session for health reasons, faces a maximum sentence of 175 years for publishing thousands of classified Pentagon documents related to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The United States government lawyers sought to dismantle the defense’s arguments, which centered on freedom of expression as protected by Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. They contend that Assange pressured the Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning to unlawfully obtain compromising documents, asserting that this conduct goes beyond routine journalism.
R istant risk for informants
The government lawyers have accused the journalist of obtaining the documents knowingly and indiscriminately, often including material with little public interest, thereby putting the lives of informants in Iraq, Syria, and Afghanistan at risk, where some disappeared or were forced to flee. Assange’s supporters have repeatedly denied these claims, arguing that there is no conclusive evidence showing harm to informants as a result of the disclosures.
The defense has reminded the judges that Wikileaks releases between 2010 and 2011 exposed war crimes carried out over many years by several U.S. administrations. They argue this underscores public interest and suggests political motivation behind the extradition request, potentially violating the extradition treaty between the United Kingdom and the United States. Washington’s representatives have denied these charges, noting that the Biden administration kept the extradition request active through the Trump era as a sign of continued US intent.
Proportional penalties under scrutiny
Assange’s family warns that extradition could raise suicide risk and worsen his already fragile physical and mental health. These concerns were considered by Judge Vanessa Baraitser when she blocked extradition in 2021, though they were later set aside after the United States offered certain assurances. Assange’s partner Stella Assange has said that she fears for her husband’s life if he is sent to the United States and has recalled reports that suggested the U.S. government plotted to seize and kill him during his time in London’s Ecuadoran Embassy from 2012 to 2019. The defense argues such allegations have no bearing on British courts, while prosecutors say they lack a credible basis for those claims.
The court has also shown concern about potential new charges that could be brought once Assange steps onto American soil, beyond the 17 counts of espionage and one count of computer intrusion that already exist. US lawyers have not ruled out the possibility of a charge of treason, which could carry the death penalty in extreme circumstances. For Assange’s advocates, the risk of disproportionately severe penalties sets a dangerous precedent for press freedom. The idea of extraditing a foreign national remains a troubling prospect to many observers.
If the judges eventually authorize extradition, Assange would have the right to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights, which could temporarily halt the process under Rule 39 – the mechanism used earlier to block the first deportation flight of asylum seekers to Rwanda in 2022. A ruling in favor of the journalist would allow him to continue the legal challenge in the United Kingdom. The court is expected to announce its decision in the coming weeks.