Rants or Insights

Complaining or Revealing

  • Home
  • Alternative news
  • About
You are here: Home / Government / Under what law is Assange facing extradition

Under what law is Assange facing extradition

October 24, 2019 By Anonymous Blogger Leave a Comment

Assange is a political prisoner

Article 4 of the US-UK extradition treaty demands that no prisoner can be extradited for "relative" political offences based on political motivations.

Since the media is ignoring it here is a link to Article 4 of the UK/US Extradition Treaty 2007 and extracted for convenience.

With Assange having been in exile in the Ecuadorean embassy, having Grand Jury Sealed indictments, being held in jail beyond his original "crime" of bail jumping, no reasonable person can argue he is not a political prisoner.

 

UK/US Extradition Treaty

Since the media is ignoring it here is a link to Article 4 of the UK/US Extradition Treaty 2007 

There is an extract of Article 4 in the corresponding column for reference.

Article 4 of the US-UK extradition treaty demands that no prisoner can be extradited for "relative" political offences based on political motivations.


Assange is essentially facing charges in the US for exposing misconduct and the killing of civilians by US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The charges are politically motivated and represent an attack on whistleblowers. This is best illustrated by the timing. The alleged crimes are reported to have taken place in 2010.

This means that the crimes were known to the government when Chelsea Manning went to a pretrial hearing in the military courts in 2011. However, the indictment was not unsealed until now. Why the long delay? If there was sufficient evidence, why wouldn't the charges have been brought against Assange in 2011 or 2010?

The US government is deliberately trying to dress it up as a breaking into a computer charge, perhaps to avoid the “political offence” clause in the extradition agreement, but make no mistake, Assange’s charges are political.

If the UK accedes to the United State’s government, it would be a strong statement on how the UK views whistleblowers. It would also set a dangerous precedent for other truth-seekers and journalists using the UK as a safe haven from repressive governments who wish to have them extradited on politically motivated charges.

Extract of Article 4

Article 4 sets forth bases for the denial of extradition.

As is customary in extradition treaties, paragraph 1 provides that extradition shall not be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested constitutes a political offense.

Article 4(2) specifies seven categories of offenses that shall not be considered to be political offenses:

  1. an offense for which both Parties have the obligation pursuant to a multilateral international agreement to extradite the person sought or to submit the case to their competent authorities for decision as to prosecution;
  2. a murder or other violent crime against the person of a Head of State of one of the Parties, or of a member of the Head of State's family;
  3. murder, manslaughter, malicious wounding, or inflicting grievous bodily harm;
  4. an offense involving kidnaping, abduction, or any form of unlawful detention, including the taking of a hostage;
  5. placing or using, or threatening the placement or use of, an explosive, incendiary, or destructive device or firearm capable of endangering life, of causing grievous bodily harm, or of causing substantial property damage;
  6. possession of an explosive, incendiary, or destructive device capable of endangering life, of causing grievous bodily harm, or of causing substantial property damage; and
  7. an attempt or a conspiracy to commit, participation in the commission of, aiding or abetting, counseling or procuring the commission of, or being an accessory before or after the fact to any of the foregoing offenses.

Article 4(3) requires that, notwithstanding the terms of paragraph 2, extradition shall not be granted if the competent authority of the Requested State determines that the request is politically motivated. In the United States, the executive branch is the competent authority for the purposes of the Article. Under the 1985 supplementary treaty, the judicial branch has the authority to consider whether an extradition request is motivated by a desire to punish the person sought on account of race, religion, nationality, or political opinions, or if the person sought would be subject to unfair treatment in UK courts or prisons after extradition.

Like all other modern extradition treaties, the new Treaty grants the executive branch rather than the judiciary the authority to determine whether a request is politically motivated.

Article 4(4) provides that the competent authority of the Requested State may also refuse extradition for offenses under military law that are not offenses under ordinary criminal law (e.g., desertion). In the United States, the executive branch is the competent authority for the purposes of the Article.

Filed Under: Government, Insights Tagged With: Corruption, Deep State, Shut up slave

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Ethereum Address

0xEfeeBf5a3bf383Cb87E7aE2BE1c59336Dd7D8FE8

Ethereum QR Code

Pay with Ethereum

Get the Abra App

The Abra app allows you to purchase cryptocurrency with your credit card and then transfer to anyone.

You can download the app here

Apple iOS or  Android

Alternative News

  • Your Kitchen Floor May Have Been Made With Uyghur Forced Labor
  • Woody Williams dies at 98 – the Last WWII Medal of Honor recipient
  • With the Corpse of Roe Still Warm, Far Right Plots Fascistic Anti-Abortion...
  • What's the difference between freehold and native title and why is it so...
  • West Australians given an extra month to get their free flu jab after...
  • Washington’s Sanctions War Kneecaps the West, Not Russia
  • Washington’s Failed Push for Anti-Russian Global Consensus
  • VTB sealed the first deal with digital financial assets in Russia
  • Uniswap analysis: UNI price can double based on a classic technical pattern
  • Ukraine is the latest neocon disaster
  • US govt delays enforcement of crypto broker reporting requirements: Report
  • U.S. Vows to Hunt Russian War Criminals — but Gives a Pass to Its...
  • Tough day for British fans as Murray, Raducanu bow out at Wimbledon
  • Tick, flea numbers explode after major wet season in southern Queensland
  • The West provoked the (Ukraine) invasion
  • The Loop: R Kelly sentenced, teachers strike in NSW, Biden announces...
  • The Colombian Left Comes to Power
  • The CEDSL Group of Academics and Activists Demands Debt Cancellation to...
  • Taiwan central bank governor considers interest-free CBDC design to...
  • Sustained transmission of monkeypox could see high-risk groups exposed,...
  • Stratis (STRAX) gains 200%+ after Sky Dream Mall metaverse and stablecoin...
  • Senior minister tells Barilaro not to take New York job
  • Ronaldo partners with Binance: Nifty Newsletter, June 22–28
  • Right-Wing Supreme Court Continues Its “Great Fraudâ€� About...
  • Rep. Cori Bush Boosts Biden’s Efforts to Fight Climate Change With...
  • Putin vs. Big Pharma: The ultimate smackdown by Edward Slavsquat
  • Progressives See Bittersweet Night in Illinois With Ouster of Marie Newman
  • Private Prisons Are a Socially Responsible Investment, According to...
  • Price analysis 6/29: BTC, ETH, BNB, XRP, ADA, SOL, DOGE, DOT, SHIB, LEO
  • Polkadot's founder announces steps toward full decentralization with new...

Categories

  • Government
  • Insights
  • Rants
  • Syndication

[footer_backtotop text="Return to Top" href="#"]

Copyright © 2022 RantsOrInsights.com