Priti Patel has approved the extradition of the WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange to the US, a decision the organisation immediately said it would appeal against in the high court.

The case passed to the British home secretary last month after the UK supreme court ruled that there were no legal questions over assurances given by US authorities on Assanges likely treatment.

While Patel has given the green light, WikiLeaks immediately released a statement to say it would appeal against the decision. Today is not the end of the fight, it said. It is only the beginning of a new legal battle. We will appeal through the legal system; the next appeal will be before the high court.

June 2010 - October 2010

WikiLeaks releases about 470,000 classified military documents concerning American diplomacy and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. It later releases a further tranche of more than 250,000 classified US diplomatic cables.

November 2010

A Swedish prosecutor issues a European arrest warrant for Assange over sexual assault allegations involving two Swedish women. Assange denies the claims.

February 2011

A British judge rules that Assange can be extradited to Sweden. Assange fears Sweden will hand him over to US authorities who could prosecute him.

November 2016

Assangeis questionedin a two-day interview over the allegations at the Ecuadorian embassy by Swedish authorities.

January 2018

Britain refuses Ecuador's request to accord Assange diplomatic status, which would allow him to leave the embassy without being arrested.

11 April 2019

Police arrest Assange at the embassyon behalf of the US after his asylum was withdrawn. He is charged by the US with 'a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified US government computer.'

24 February 2020

Assange's extradition hearing begins at Woolwich crown court in south-east London. After a week of opening arguments, the extradition case is to be adjourned until May. Further delays are caused by the coronavirus outbreak.

15 September 2020

A hearing scheduled for four weeks begins at the Old Bailey with the US government making their case that Assange tried to recruit hackers to find classified government information.

4 January 2021

A British judge rules that Assange cannot be extradited to the US. The US appeals against the judgment.

Thank you for your feedback.

The statement said anyone who cared about freedom of expression should be deeply ashamed that the home secretary had approved Assanges extradition.

Julian did nothing wrong. He has committed no crime and is not a criminal. He is a journalist and a publisher and he is being punished for doing his job, it said. It was in Priti Patels power to do the right thing. Instead she will for ever be remembered as an accomplice of the United States in its agenda to turn investigative journalism into a criminal enterprise.

Any appeal is likely to focus on grounds such as the right to freedom of expression and whether the extradition request is politically motivated. Patel had been considering whether the US extradition request met remaining legal tests, including a promise not to execute him.

Assange is being held at Belmarsh prison in London after a lengthy battle to avoid extradition. At a press conference in London, his wife, Stella Assange, said: We are not at the end of the road here. We are going to fight this. We are going to use every available avenue. Im going to use every waking hour fighting for Julian until he is free, until justice is served.

The saga was triggered in 2010 when WikiLeaks published a series of leaks provided by the then US army soldier Chelsea Manning, as well as a dump of more than 250,000 US diplomatic cables, some of which were published in the Guardian and elsewhere, containing classified diplomatic analysis from world leaders. The US government launched a criminal investigation into the leaks.

Also in 2010, an arrest warrant for Assange was issued for two separate sexual assault allegations in Sweden. The UK ruled that he should be extradited to Sweden. This prompted him to enter the Ecuadorian embassy in London in August 2012, claiming political asylum. He feared that if he was extradited to Sweden he would in turn be extradited to the US.

Assange finally left the embassy in 2019. He was arrested in the UK for skipping bail and ultimately jailed, then extradition proceedings to the US were started against him.

Assanges brother said on Friday that the appeal would include new information not previously taken to the courts, including claims made in a report last year of plans to assassinate him.

It will likely be a few days before the [14-day appeal] deadline and the appeal will include new information on how Julians lawyers were spied on, and how there were plots to kidnap and kill Julian from within the CIA, Gabriel Shipton told Reuters in an interview.

Patels decision was met with immediate criticism from campaigners, journalists and MPs. Caroline Lucas, the Green party MP for Brighton Pavilion, said: Absolutely shameful that Priti Patel has approved Julian Assanges extradition to US this sets a dangerous precedent for press freedom and democracy. US authorities are determined to silence him because they dont like what he revealed.

The former cabinet minister David Davis said: Sadly, I do not believe Mr Assange will get a fair trial. This extradition treaty needs to be rewritten to give British and American citizens identical rights, unlike now.

The veteran BBC broadcaster John Simpson said: Journalists in Britain and elsewhere will be very worried by the decision to extradite Julian Assange to the US both for his own wellbeing and for the precedent it creates for journalism worldwide.

John Pilger, a journalist and longtime supporter of Assange and a fellow Australian, said: A new appeal will challenge the political rottenness of British justice.

The new Australian government said it believed Assanges case had dragged on for too long and that it should be brought to a close. We will continue to express this view to the governments of the United Kingdom and the United States, the foreign affairs minister, Penny Wong, and the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, said in a statement responding to Patels decision.

The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, had said last year, when he was the opposition leader, that he did not see what purpose is served by the ongoing pursuit of Mr Assange and that enough is enough.

Sign up to First Edition, our free daily newsletter every weekday morning at 7am

A Home Office spokesperson said: On 17 June, following consideration by both the magistrates court and high court, the extradition of Mr Julian Assange to the US was ordered. Mr Assange retains the normal 14-day right to appeal.

In this case, the UK courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr Assange.

Nor have they found that extradition would be incompatible with his human rights, including his right to a fair trial and to freedom of expression, and that whilst in the US he will be treated appropriately, including in relation to his health.

Reuters contributed to this report

Read the original:
Julian Assanges extradition from UK to US approved by home secretary

Keep Ithaka always in your mind.Arriving there is where youre destined for.

C. P. Cavafy, trans. Edmund Keeley

John Shipton, despite his size, glides with insect-like grace across surfaces. He moves with a hovering sense, a holy man with message and meaning. As Julian Assanges father, he has found himself a bearer of messages and meaning, attempting to convince those in power that good sense and justice should prevail over brute stupidity and callousness. His one object: release Julian.

At the now defunct Druids Caf on Swanston Street in Melbourne, he materialised out of the shadows, seeking candidates to stump for the incipient WikiLeaks Party over a decade ago. The intention was to run candidates in the 2013 Senate elections in Australia, providing a platform for the publisher, then confined in the less than commodious surrounds of the Ecuadorian embassy in London. Soft, a voice of reed and bird song, Shipton urged activists and citizens to join the fray, to save his son, to battle for a cause imperishably golden and pure. From this summit, power would be held accountable, institutions would function with sublime transparency, and citizens could be assured that their privacy would be protected.

In the documentary Ithaka, directed by Ben Lawrence, we see Shipton, Assanges partner, Stella, the two children, the cat, glimpses of brother Gabriel, all pointing to the common cause that rises to the summit of purpose. The central figure, who only ever manifests in spectral form on screen via phone or fleeting footage is one of moral reminder, the purpose that supplies blood for all these figures. Assange is being held at Belmarsh, Britains most secure and infamous of prisons, denied bail, and being crushed by judicial procedure. But in these supporters, he has some vestigial reminders of a life outside.

The films promotion site describes the subject as, The worlds most famous political prisoner, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange a figure who has become an emblem of an international arm wrestle over freedom of journalism, government corruption and unpunished war crimes. But it takes such a moment as Stellas remarks in Geneva reflecting on the freshly erected statue of her husband to give a sense of breath, flesh and blood. I am here to remind you that Julian isnt a name, he isnt a symbol, hes a man and hes suffering.

And suffer he shall, if the UK Home Secretary Priti Patel decides to agree to the wishes of the US Department of Justice. The DOJ insists that their man face 17 charges framed, disgracefully and archaically, from a US law passed during the First World War and inimical to free press protections. (The eighteenth, predictably, deals with computer intrusion.) The Espionage Act of 1917 has become the crutch and support for prosecutors who see, in Assange, less a journalist than an opportunistic hacker who outed informants and betrayed confidences. Seductively, he gathered a following and persuaded many that the US imperium was not flaxen of hair and noble of heart. Beneath the impostor lay the bodies of Collateral Murder, war crimes and torture. The emperor not only lacked clothes but was a sanctimonious murderer to boot.

Material for Lawrence comes readily enough, largely because of a flat he shared with Shipton during filming in England. The notable pauses over bread and a glass of wine, pregnant with meaning, the careful digestion of questions before the snappy response, and the throwaway line of resigned wisdom, are all repeated signatures. In the background are the crashes and waves of the US imperium, menacing comfort and ravaging peace. All of this is a reminder that individual humanity is the best antidote to rapacious power.

Through the film, the exhausting sense of media, that estate ever present but not always listening, comes through. This point is significant enough; the media at least in terms of the traditional fourth estate put huge stock in the release of material from WikiLeaks in 2010, hailing the effort and praising the man behind it. But relations soured, and tabloid nastiness set in. The Left found tell-all information and tales of Hillary Clinton too much to handle while the Right, having initially revelled in the revelations of WikiLeaks in 2016, took to demonising the herald. Perversely, in the United States, accord was reached across a good number of political denizens: Assange had to go, and to go, he had to be prosecuted in the United Kingdom and extradited to the United States.

The documentary covers the usual highlights without overly pressing the viewer. A decent run-up is given to the Ecuadorian stint lasting 7 years, with Assanges bundling out, and the Old Bailey proceedings covering extradition. But Shipton and Stella Moris are the ones who provide the balancing acts in this mission to aid the man they both love.

Shipton, at points, seems tired and disgusted, his face abstracted in pain. He is dedicated, because the mission of a father is to be such. His son is in, as he puts it, the shit, and he is going to damn well shovel him out of it. But there is nothing blindingly optimistic about the endeavour.

The film has faced, as with its subject, the usual problems of distribution and discussion. When Assange is mentioned, the dull minded exit for fear of reputation, and the hysterical pronounce and pounce. In Gabriel Shiptons words, All of the negative propaganda and character assassination is so pervasive that many people in the sector and the traditional distribution outlets dont want to be seen as engaging in advocacy for Julian.

Where Assange goes, the power monopolies recoil. Distribution and the review of a documentary such as Ithaka is bound to face problems in the face of such a compromised, potted media terrain. Assange is a reminder of plague in the patient of democracy, pox on the body politic.

Despite these efforts, Shipton and Assanges new wife are wandering minds, filled with experiences of hurt and hope. Shipton, in particular, gives off a smell of resignation before the execution. Its not in the sense of Candide, where Panglossian glory occupies the mind and we accept that the lot delved out is the best possible of all possible worlds. Shipton offers something else: things can only get worse, but he would still do it again. As we all should, when finding our way to Ithaka.

Dr. Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He currently lectures at RMIT University. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

Read the rest here:
Julian Assange In Ithaka| Countercurrents

British and Australian lawmakers have reacted with anger to U.K. Home Secretary Priti Patel's decision to approve the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States.

Assange, an Australian citizen, faces 17 charges in the U.S. under the Espionage Act relating to classified documents that were leaked in 2010 and 2011, which the U.S. says broke the law and endangered lives. The documents obtained by WikiLeaks revealed that 66,000 civilians had been killed by Iraqi forces and that the U.S. military had killed hundreds of civilians during the war in Afghanistan in previously undisclosed incidents.

Patel's decision was met with anger by politicians in the United Kingdom and Australia on Friday.

"The decision by the UK Govt to approve extradition of Julian Assange to the US is an outrageous betrayal of rule of law, media freedom and human rights," tweeted Australian independent MP Andrew Wilkie. He added that Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese "must pick up the phone now and demand an end to this madness."

Jeremy Corbyn, a British MP and former leader of the country's Labour Party tweeted: "The Home Secretary's decision to allow Julian Assange's extradition to the US is utterly wrong and marks a very dark day for press freedom and the justice system."

"We will continue the fight to free Julian Assange," he said.

Labour MP Richard Burgon expressed a similar sentiment, tweeting: "Disgraceful decision by Priti Patel to approve the extradition of Julian Assange to the USA. There he faces the rest of his life in prison for his journalistic work exposing war crimes in US-led wars on Afghanistan and Iraq. This decision strikes a blow to press freedom."

Claudia Webbe, an independent British MP, tweeted: "Julian Assange is a hero for exposing war crimes of the USA. Just the type of person Priti Patel prefers in jail, far away from the ability to expose more truth."

"The news that the UK has decided to extradite Julian Assange to the US makes me feel sick and deeply saddened," tweeted Australian Senator Jordan Steele-John of the Green Party. "Julian can not be left to die in prison. The Aus Government must intervene @AlboMP it's time to pick up the phone to Washington," he added, tagging the prime minister's Twitter account.

Others also weighed in on the news of Assange's possible extradition on Friday.

The International Federation of Journalists' official Twitter account said: "The UK decision to allow the extradition of Assange is vindictive and a real blow to media freedom. He has simply exposed issues that were in the public interest and Patel's failure to acknowledge this is shameful and sets a terrible precedent."

"The same people who brought you the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan with all their attendant death, destruction and criminality are now telling you it's imperative to destroy the life of Julian Assange because HE is a threat to our national security," tweeted former U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Marianne Williamson.

Patel's move comes after the U.K. Supreme Court ruled that Assange could be extradited in March. Westminster Magistrates' Court in London then formally ordered his extradition in April, sending the matter to Patel for a final decision.

Assange now has 14 days to appeal the decision.

Update 06/17/22, 9 a.m. ET: This article was updated to include more information.

Read more:
Julian Assange Extradition to U.S. an 'Outrageous Betrayal,' Lawmakers Say

LONDON (AP) The British government on Friday ordered the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States to face spying charges, a milestone but not the end of a decade-long legal saga sparked by his website's publication of classified U.S. documents.

WikiLeaks said it would challenge the order, and Assange's lawyers have 14 days to lodge an appeal.

Were not at the end of the road here," said Assange's wife, Stella Assange. Were going to fight this.

Julian Assange has battled in British courts for years to avoid being sent to the U.S., where he faces 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse.

American prosecutors say the Australian citizen helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal classified diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks later published, putting lives at risk.

To his supporters, Assange, 50, is a secrecy-busting journalist who exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan.

A British court ruled in April that Assange could be sent to face trial in the U.S., sending the case to the U.K. government for a decision. Britains interior minister, Home Secretary Priti Patel, signed an order on Friday authorizing Assanges extradition.

The Home Office said in a statement that the government had to approve his move to the U.S. because the U.K. courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr. Assange.

Barry Pollack, Assanges U.S. lawyer, said it was disappointing news that should concern anyone who cares about the First Amendment and the right to publish.

Assange's lawyers said they would mount a new legal challenge, and legal experts say the case could take months or even years more to conclude.

"We will appeal this all the way, if necessary to the European Court of Human Rights, Assange attorney Jennifer Robinson said.

Robinson asked U.S. President Joe Biden to drop the charges brought against Assange during Donald Trump's presidency, arguing they posed a grave threat to free speech.

During a press conference outside the British Consulate in New York City, Assanges father, John Shipton, also urged the U.S. to drop the prosecution.

All it will take is a simple telephone call from Attorney General Merrick Garland to the home secretary in the United Kingdom to drop these charges. Thats all it will take. Its not complex, he said.

Assange's supporters and lawyers maintain he was acting as a journalist and is entitled to First Amendment protections of freedom of speech. They argue that the case is politically motivated, that he would face inhumane treatment and be unable to get a fair trial in the U.S.

Silkie Carlo, director of civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, said the British governments complicity in the political persecution of a journalist simply for revealing uncomfortable truths to the public is appalling, wrong and shames our country.

Stella Assange, a lawyer who married her husband in a prison ceremony in March, said the U.K. decision marked a dark day for press freedom and for British democracy.

Julian did nothing wrong, she said. He has committed no crime and is not a criminal. He is a journalist and a publisher, and he is being punished for doing his job.

Friday's decision came after a legal battle that went all the way to the U.K. Supreme Court.

A British district court judge initially rejected the extradition request on the grounds that Assange was likely to kill himself if held under harsh U.S. prison conditions. U.S. authorities later provided assurances that the WikiLeaks founder wouldnt face the severe treatment that his lawyers said would put his physical and mental health at risk.

Those assurances led Britain's High Court and Supreme Court to overturn the lower court's ruling.

Journalism organizations and human rights groups had called on Britain to refuse the extradition request. Assanges lawyers say he could face up to 175 years in jail if he is convicted in the U.S., though American authorities have said any sentence is likely to be much lower than that.

Amnesty International Secretary General Agnes Callamard said Friday that extraditing Assange would put him at great risk and sends a chilling message to journalists the world over.

Assange remains in London's high-security Belmarsh Prison, where he has been since he was arrested in 2019 for skipping bail during a separate legal battle. Before that, he spent seven years inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to avoid extradition to Sweden to face allegations of rape and sexual assault.

Sweden dropped the sex crimes investigations in November 2019 because so much time had elapsed, but British judges have kept Assange in prison pending the outcome of the extradition case.

Assanges supporters say his physical and mental health are both under strain. Stella Assange told a news conference that her husbands condition was deteriorating by the day.

I spoke to him last night as well and he had a lot of anxiety. He couldnt sleep, she said. But Julian is a fighter.

Associated Press writers Eric Tucker in Washington and Bobby Caina Calvan in New York contributed.

Go here to see the original:
UK govt orders Julian Assange's extradition; appeal planned

Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange could now be extradited from the UK to the U.S.

The decision was rubberstamped by UK Home Secretary Priti Patel this morning and Assange now has 14 days to appeal.

The Home Office said the extradition would not be incompatible with his human rights and that while in the U.S. he will be treated appropriately.

Wikileaks said on Twitter it is a dark day for press freedom and British democracy, adding, Julian did nothing wrong. He has committed no crime and is not a criminal. He is a journalist and publisher, and is being punished for doing his job.

Assange has been in the UK for the past three years and was arrested and incarcerated in HMP Belmarsh in April 2019 for breaching bail, with multiple extradition hearings taking place during this time.

The U.S. Justice department filed 17 charges against Assange for violating the Espionage Act alleging that material obtained by Wikileaks endangered lives, but Asssanges legal team claimed that classified documents published by Wikileaks, which related to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, exposed U.S. wrongdoing and were in the public interest.

Link:
Julian Assange Can Be Extradited To U.S., Says UK Government

LONDON The British government approved an extradition order Friday for Julian Assange, the embattled WikiLeaks founder, confirming a court decision that he can be sent to the United States to stand trial on espionage charges, though his legal fight against the decision is not over.

While the order is a blow for Assange, whose case is seen by rights groups as a potential challenge to press freedom, he is expected to appeal the decision in a British court, and the government said he had 14 days to do so.

The Home Office, in a statement, pointed to a British court ruling that did not find that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr. Assange. Additionally, the statement said, the courts did not find that extradition would be incompatible with his human rights, including his right to a fair trial and to freedom of expression, and that whilst in the US he will be treated appropriately, including in relation to his health.

This is disappointing news that should concern anyone who cares about the First Amendment and the right to publish, said Barry J. Pollack, a lawyer for Assange in the United States. The decision will be appealed.

The approval of the order by Priti Patel, the home secretary, is just the latest turn in a long-running court battle and comes after a British court ordered Assanges extradition in April.

In its statement, the Home Office said that, if Assange wishes to fight his extradition, his next legal step would be to apply to the High Court for permission to appeal against the decisions of both a district judge and Patel to order it.

In 2019, Assange was charged in the United States under the Espionage Act in connection with obtaining and publishing classified government documents about the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq on WikiLeaks in 2010. Those files were leaked by Chelsea Manning, a former military intelligence analyst, before being published by the site.

Throughout the prolonged legal battle against his extradition, Assange has remained in custody in London at Belmarsh prison, where he has been detained for nearly three years. Assange married his partner, Stella Moris, in prison this year.

We are going to fight this; we are going to use every appeal avenue, she said on Friday, adding, I am going to spend every waking hour fighting for Julian until he is free, until justice is served.

He was arrested in London in 2019 after spending seven years holed up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in an effort to avoid detention as he fought extradition to Sweden, where he was wanted for questioning in a rape inquiry. That case was later dropped.

Under current government guidelines, Patel is able to block extradition requests only in a small number of circumstances. Those include cases concerning people previously extradited or transferred to Britain from elsewhere, others involving people facing the death penalty, or those who might be charged with further, previously unannounced offenses after their transfers.

But if none of those issues were involved, Patel would have no reason to refuse an extradition request and would be obliged to comply, according to the Home Office.

However, Assanges legal team will still be able to apply to appeal to Britains High Court on both Patels decision and potentially on a number of other points of concern about the US request. The High Court will then decide which points Assange may appeal, if any. This process could take several months.

Once he has exhausted his options in British courts, Assange could also try to appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.

One of that courts rulings this week grounded a flight that was scheduled to take some asylum-seekers to Rwanda from Britain. Since then, some lawmakers from Prime Minister Boris Johnsons Conservative Party have called on Britain to remove itself from the remit of the court, which is part of the Council of Europe rather than the European Union.

Rights groups have expressed worries that Assanges extradition to the United States could threaten press freedom, and when the court made a decision on his case, several organizations denounced the move.

The Home Offices decision to extradite Julian Assange exposes its complicity in undermining press freedom just as it claims to be a world leader on freedom of expression, Quinn McKew, the executive director of Article 19, which campaigns for freedom of expression, said in a statement.

It also sends a worrying message to the world that journalists, activists and anyone who exposes important truths about crimes including those committed by governments and businesses do not deserve protection for their rights to impart information and speak freely, the statement added.

Several opposition lawmakers expressed their concerns about the decision, as did one senior Conservative lawmaker, former Cabinet minister David Davis.

Sadly I do not believe Mr Assange will get a fair trial, he wrote on Twitter. This extradition treaty needs to be rewritten to give British and American citizens identical rights, unlike now.

Follow this link:
Britain approves extradition order for Assange - The Boston Globe

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange pauses as he makes a statement to media gathered outside the High Court in London in 2011. Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP hide caption

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange pauses as he makes a statement to media gathered outside the High Court in London in 2011.

LONDON (AP) The British government has ordered the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States to face spying charges. WikiLeaks said it would appeal.

Home Secretary Priti Patel signed the extradition order on Friday, her department said. It follows a British court ruling in April that Assange could be sent to the U.S. over WikiLeaks' publication of a huge trove of classified documents more than a decade ago.

The Home Office said in a statement that "the U.K courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr. Assange."

"Nor have they found that extradition would be incompatible with his human rights, including his right to a fair trial and to freedom of expression, and that whilst in the U.S. he will be treated appropriately, including in relation to his health."

The decision is a big moment in Assange's years-long battle to avoid facing trial in the U.S. though not necessarily the end of the tale. Assange has 14 days to appeal.

The U.S. has asked British authorities to extradite Assange so he can stand trial on 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse. American prosecutors say Assange unlawfully helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal classified diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks later published, putting lives at risk.

"Today is not the end of the fight. It is only the beginning of a new legal battle," said Assange's wife, Stella Assange. She said the U.K. decision marked "a dark day for press freedom and for British democracy."

"Julian did nothing wrong," she said. "He has committed no crime and is not a criminal. He is a journalist and a publisher, and he is being punished for doing his job."

A British judge approved the extradition in April, leaving the final decision to the government. The ruling came after a legal battle that went all the way to the U.K. Supreme Court.

Journalism organizations and human rights groups have called on Britain to refuse the extradition request.

Supporters and lawyers for Assange, 50, argue that he was acting as a journalist and is entitled to First Amendment protections of freedom of speech for publishing documents that exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. They argue that his case is politically motivated.

Assange's lawyers say he could face up to 175 years in jail if he is convicted in the U.S., though American authorities have said any sentence is likely to be much lower than that.

Assange has been held at Britain's high-security Belmarsh Prison in London since 2019, when he was arrested for skipping bail during a separate legal battle. Before that, he spent seven years inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to avoid extradition to Sweden to face allegations of rape and sexual assault.

Sweden dropped the sex crimes investigations in November 2019 because so much time had elapsed.

Link:
The U.K. says Julian Assange can be extradited to the U.S. to face spying charges - NPR

The government has approved the extradition of Julian Assange to the US, where he faces espionage charges.

The Home Office confirmed Home Secretary Priti Patel had signed the extradition order for the WikiLeaks founder.

Assange is wanted in the US over an alleged conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defence information after WikiLeaks published hundreds of thousands of leaked documents relating to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars.

He has always denied any wrongdoing.

Assange has 14-days to appeal the decision and his legal team said they will be appealing.

"Today is not the end of the fight. It is only the beginning of a new legal battle. We will appeal through the legal system," WikiLeaks said in a statement.

"This is a dark day for press freedom and for British democracy.

"Anyone in this country who cares about freedom of expression should be deeply ashamed that the home secretary has approved the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States, the country that plotted his assassination".

Assange has been held in Belmarsh high-security prison since 2019 when he was dragged out of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he had taken refuge.

Originally a judge ruled that Assange should not be deported, saying his mental health problems would make him a suicide risk if convicted.

However, this decision was overturned on appeal.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

In a statement, a Home Office spokesperson said: "On 17 June, following consideration by both the Magistrates Court and High Court, the extradition of Mr Julian Assange to the US was ordered.

"In this case, the UK courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr Assange. Nor have they found that extradition would be incompatible with his human rights, including his right to a fair trial and to freedom of expression, and that whilst in the US he will be treated appropriately, including in relation to his health."

Amnesty International said the decision to extradite Assange "sends a chilling message to journalists".

Read more:Assange put through 'hell' at embassy, says former diplomatFugitive or hero? Timeline of Julian Assange's legal battle

'Julian is a political prisoner'

In March, Assange married his partner, Stella Moris, after they were given permission to wed last year.

She was joined by the couple's sons Gabriel, four, and Max, two, and Assange's father and brother, Richard and Gabriel Shipton.

Mrs Assange said: "The home secretary has approved sending Julian to the country that planned to murder him. Julian has exposed US government criminality.

"The home secretary is condoning not only the criminality committed by the US government against Julian, but also those US government crimes exposed by WikiLeaks.

"Julian is a political prisoner. We will use every avenue to appeal this decision. I will dedicate every waking hour to fight for justice until he is free."

Here is the original post:
Julian Assange: Government approves extradition of WikiLeaks founder to the US - Sky News

LONDON (AP) The British government has ordered the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange to the United States to face spying charges. He is likely to appeal.

Home Secretary Priti Patel signed the extradition order on Friday, her department said. It follows a British court ruling in April that Assange could be sent to the U.S.

The Home Office said in a statement that the U.K courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr. Assange.

Nor have they found that extradition would be incompatible with his human rights, including his right to a fair trial and to freedom of expression, and that whilst in the U.S. he will be treated appropriately, including in relation to his health.

The decision is a big moment in Assanges years-long battle to avoid facing trial in the U.S. though not necessarily the end of the tale. Assange has 14 days to appeal.

A British judge approved the extradition in April, leaving the final decision to the government. The ruling came after a legal battle that went all the way to the U.K. Supreme Court.

The U.S. has asked British authorities to extradite Assange so he can stand trial on 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse over WikiLeaks publication of a huge trove of classified documents more than a decade ago. American prosecutors say Assange unlawfully helped U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal classified diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks later published, putting lives at risk.

Journalism organizations and human rights groups have called on Britain to refuse the extradition request.

Supporters and lawyers for Assange, 50, argue that he was acting as a journalist and is entitled to First Amendment protections of freedom of speech for publishing documents that exposed U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. They argue that his case is politically motivated.

Assanges lawyers say he could face up to 175 years in jail if he is convicted in the U.S., though American authorities have said any sentence is likely to be much lower than that.

Assange has been held at Britains high-security Belmarsh Prison in London since 2019, when he was arrested for skipping bail during a separate legal battle. Before that, he spent seven years inside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to avoid extradition to Sweden to face allegations of rape and sexual assault.

Sweden dropped the sex crimes investigations in November 2019 because so much time had elapsed.

The rest is here:
British Government Approves Extradition Of Julian Assange To U.S.; Appeal Possible - HuffPost