Stella Assange: 'It's not safe to send Julian to the United States'

St. I just want to know your reaction to today's decision. Well, I find the decision strange. The courts have identified three major obstacles to Julian's extradition, but have called for political intervention by the US government to address these issues and are waiting. Do you think that will happen by noon? Well, the United States has given until April 16 to issue so-called diplomatic assurances and then if they do, there will be a hearing on May 20. provisional timetable there is a sense that they can give those guarantees in this time frame that they have there is no guarantee that the US can give that will keep Julian

safe

from what he is exposed to what the US government The US has said under oath that it intends to discriminate against you because of your nationality, that you are not entitled to constitutional protections under the First Amendment, and UK courts have asked the US government to contradict these US submissions.

US prosecutors. The UK courts have also identified the death penalty as a real possibility and that is obviously his and Julian's greatest fear. Julian is at risk of losing his life either to the death penalty or to being murdered because we know that the US administration under the Trump administration had previously conspired to assassinate him. and furthermore, if they take him to the United States, they will place him in conditions of extreme isolation that could and will lead him to commit suicide, so it is not

safe

to

send

him to the United States and that is the bottom line. which the UK courts should have arrived by now, but unfortunately we are still in this position where the UK courts are now essentially putting the ball in the US side so they can maybe blame the US.

USA if something goes wrong. Has Julian reacted to this? Have you spoken with him? I spoke to him very briefly, our conversations are only 10 minutes at a time, after 10 minutes he just cuts off, so I haven't been able to talk to him much, we just found out about the decision. Like everyone else except Julian, the decision must be read, because he does not have access to the Internet, so Julian is very isolated and away from the world because he is in a cell where he has been for almost 5 years. How is he? I know you've talked in the past about his mental state and how is he doing now?

Since there are all these things happening right now. Well, every day is a struggle. He has been in this indefinite imprisonment it will be 5 years on April 11th he is not convicted of any crime basically they keep him in a legal limbo um and this is indefinite detention it is equivalent to torture we know that international experts um To say that indefinite detention is psychological torture and certainly after several years of being in this situation he is treated like another prisoner, except that he is not serving a sentence or convicted of any crime. He should be released.

This case should never have been filed. Do you regret any of this? Julian didn't do anything wrong. The United States has launched an unprecedented case against a publisher for publishing the truth. Julian was not the source of these documents. He had no duty to the US government. In fact, he is not even a US Citizen, he was not in the United States, the case that the United States has brought against Julian is unprecedented and extreme, basically saying that anyone, anywhere in the world, can be imprisoned if they publish true information that shames and divides. of the US government has always been seen as a highly controversial case in the United States.

Certainly all the press freedom groups say it's an attack on press freedom and it puts journalists everywhere at risk, so I think it's the US government that needs to review it. This case and I really dropped the case against him because all he did was publish the truth and it is the US government that says that as a result of the publication of these documents lives were put at risk and that is a of the reasons why We're saying they needed to take action, actually under oath. The United States says they have not found any cases of anyone being harmed as a result of these publications.

They have this topic of conversation, but then when it comes to proving it in court. They say they have no evidence of it, it is something they have basically been pushing for 13 years to divert attention from the damage that was caused and evidenced in these documents, that is, war crimes, torture, murder squads and rapes of the most High standards. An order against international law committed by the country that is trying to exodus it. It is a way to divert attention from the real crimes committed by the US and to try to silence the editor who puts that evidence in the public domain, given everything Julian has been through do you think he would do it again if he had to do it?

Well, the United States is essentially criminalizing public interest journalism and with this case they are saying that if you publish the truth about crimes committed in wartime, crimes committed against innocents. people, innocent victim of IMS, then they will be imprisoned and that precedent will not stand and we have to push for the case to be dropped because if it is allowed to stand, then journalism is basically a crime, exposing the murder of innocent people. people can never be considered a crime in a democratic and open society, so everything revolves around this case being dropped, Dred, to do it again.

Julian is the most principled man I know and he too feels that he has a duty to do so. the public if there is information in their possession, for example, about war crimes that this material evidences, then that information must be published and we trust that journalists are protected to publish material, whether it is labeled secret or not, because sometimes States often label it. the things they want to cover up secretly is a cover up, so journalists must have the ability to publish that information regardless of whether their duty is to the public. The source, sometimes insiders, sometimes could be violating their contract or their official duty. or whatever, it is a separate case, they should be protected, but it is a separate case.

Julian is being prosecuted for publishing for doing the work that journalists do and that is what is at stake, the ability of editors to publish the truth and keep the public informed. The Wall Street Journal reports that the Americans could offer some kind of plea deal, is something you know about or is being discussed. I refer you to Julian's statement from the US Defense Council, there is no indication that the US is trying to do anything other than imprison Julian for 175 years and convict him for publishing evidence of war crimes , so the United States should use today's decision by the United Kingdom to reconsider its position and abandon this case, which is a case. that was brought in by the Trump Administration and is the most dangerous and lasting U.S. legacy of the Trump Administration.

Without a doubt, this whole situation has taken a huge toll on you, your family, your children and Julian, what would you like to see now? I would like to see this case dropped and Julian freed. What are your hopes for the future? Well, we have two little kids, they're five and six and they need their dad every day while Julian is home. Prison is a day when they are deprived of their father and their father's love, affection and guidance. We get to see Julian once or twice a week, but that's obviously nothing at all and Julian shouldn't have spent a single day in prison. prison, he is a political prisoner and I want our children to grow up knowing that the British system put an end to this, put an end to the persecution of a publisher and, unfortunately, so far, that is not the story.

I can say to our children Stella, thank you very much for your time, thank you.