USA:s åtal mot Julian Assange och frågan om Assange därför ska utlämnas till USA

The gaunt, other-worldly figure of Julian Assange will loom from behind a perspex screen at the start of a four-week Old Bailey hearing tomorrow that is likely to determine his fate.

Two courtrooms have been set aside for the proceedings. Much about the Assange case is oversized, not least the cost – put at tens of millions of pounds – and the sentence he faces of 175 years, should a district judge grant his extradition to the United States. Outside the court, supporters are expected to gather to deliver impassioned speeches, raise their fists in solidarity and cry: ‘Free Assange.’

I förundersökningen mot Assange finns endast en handling, ett mejl, som rör kontakter med USA. Det handlar om kontakt med FBI och rör en allmän fråga, betydelselös för själva Assange-saken.

I de engelska handlingarna däremot finns här och där hänvisningar till USA. Men alla sådana hänvisningar är maskade och jag har inte lyckats utröna vad de handlar om.

Svenska SÄPO ger inga upplysningar, detta med hänvisning till att de inte vill röja vad de gjort och inte gjort i ärendet Assange. Eller som de uttrycker det i ett svar på en begäran att få ta del av handlingar rörande Assange: ”Enligt Säkerhetspolisen står det inte klart att uppgiften om de eventuella handlingarnas existens kan röjas utan att syftet med beslutade eller förutsedda åtgärder hos Säpo motverkas eller den framtida verksamheten skadas.”

Jag har fått fram för lite för att dra några slutsatser om det finns eller inte finns fog för misstankarna att Sverige skulle ha kontakter med USA när det gäller Assange

Julian Assange hearing paused for lawyer to get Covid test
Judge grants adjournment until Monday in extradition hearing against WikiLeaks co-founder

[Ellsberg] had not redacted a single name of an informant or even a covert CIA agent (which he knew to be against the law) so that redactions would not be used as an excuse to undermine the credibility of the Papers.

Ellsberg testified that he rejected the notion that had grown up in mainstream media of Good Ellsberg, Bad Assange. He said in fact Assange had, unlike himself, redacted names, withheld 15,000 sensitive documents, and had asked the Pentagon and State Department for help in making further redactions. But both had refused to help him. Ellsberg speculated that it was done so that the government could later prosecute him for revealing names, which is what it is doing now.

Lewis retorted, “So it’s all the governments’ fault then.”

“Yes, they bear a heavy responsibility,” Ellsberg responded.

He said the government was being “highly cynical” in suddenly feigning concern for the informants when they did not try to help when Assange approached them.

However three important matters have emerged on the issue in testimony so far:

1. It’s not against the law to reveal the names of informants.

2. Assange did not reveal informants names first.

3. Not a single informant is known to have been harmed by the revelation of their names.