Speaker 1: From Schwartz Media. I'm Ashlin McGee. This is seven am.
Speaker 1: Punishment by process is the way Julie Messandra's lawyer describes
Speaker 1: the long, meandering core process he's facing. In a decision
Speaker 1: that may have saved him from being immediately extradited to
Speaker 1: the US. The British High Court ruled on Monday that
Speaker 1: it'll hear one more appeal against his extradition, but not
Speaker 1: until later this year. The only other literal get out
Speaker 1: of jail card for Assange is if the US drops
Speaker 1: the charges against him. Today, his lawyer Jennifer Robinson on
Speaker 1: why she's back in Australia lobbying the government and whether
Speaker 1: they can secure a deal before the US election in November.
Speaker 1: It's Wednesday, May twenty two. So, Jen, you're someone who's
Speaker 1: stood by Juliana Satane during some of his most crucial
Speaker 1: legal battles. Last night you were watching via video link.
Speaker 1: What was that like?
Speaker 2: It was difficult for me. I don't like being away
Speaker 2: because I'm always there for the hearings, but for other
Speaker 2: work reasons, I had to be here and so you know,
Speaker 2: I've it's seven thirty at night. I'm logging onto the
Speaker 2: British Morning those of us who have been granted remote
Speaker 2: access are able to watch. We see on the screen
Speaker 2: my colleagues sitting there preparing to stand up and raise
Speaker 2: the arguments. I can see Stella sitting behind our council
Speaker 2: and knowing how nerve wracking this is for her. I'd
Speaker 2: been speaking to her before court well.
Speaker 3: That the sports do the right thing today.
Speaker 2: And find in Julian's favor. It's such a momentous moment
Speaker 2: because he could have been extradited and we don't know
Speaker 2: what's going to happen, and we have to be prepared
Speaker 2: for every outcome. So obviously a huge amount of preparation
Speaker 2: goes into that before we sit down to attend the hearing.
Speaker 2: But the outcomes for him either were you're being extraduted
Speaker 2: and you're on a plane, in which case we would
Speaker 2: be scrambling to make a European Court of Human Rights
Speaker 2: application to try and stop it, which is not guaranteed.
Speaker 2: So he could have been on a plane to the
Speaker 2: United States. Now we've got this brief reprieve. We spent
Speaker 2: a long time hearing the United States putting lipstick on
Speaker 2: a pig, but the judges did not buy it.
Speaker 4: As a family We're a relief, but how long can
Speaker 4: this go on?
Speaker 2: States So obviously for his family and for all of
Speaker 2: us who have been working so hard on his case.
Speaker 2: A it's a relief, but a brief reprieve.
Speaker 1: So was Julian the sangin court last night?
Speaker 2: He wasn't in court. Unfortunately, he's just not well enough.
Speaker 2: Your listeners might remember that in one of the appeal
Speaker 2: hearings over the past few years since he's been in
Speaker 2: belmart he had a mini stroke and so the stress
Speaker 2: of those proceedings and his mental and physical health have
Speaker 2: declined significantly. So for us, we are trying to protect
Speaker 2: him as best we can. So he had permission to appear.
Speaker 2: The court had given him permission to appear in person.
Speaker 2: It was decided that he was not able to because
Speaker 2: of his health picture.
Speaker 1: So tell me a little bit more about what happened
Speaker 1: inside the court, what was said, and what was discussed.
Speaker 2: So we won the case back in twenty twenty one
Speaker 2: on the basis that it would be oppressive to extradite
Speaker 2: Julian to the United States because of his particular mental
Speaker 2: health picture and the oppressive prison conditions he would face
Speaker 2: in the United States.
Speaker 4: Supporters of Julian Assange erupt in cheers as Judge Vanessa
Speaker 4: Bartzer handed down her ruling rejecting the United States request
Speaker 4: to extrad ademp citing concerns over his mental health.
Speaker 2: The medical experts said that it would cause his suicide,
Speaker 2: so the prison conditions would cause his death. His extradition
Speaker 2: was barred on that basis. The US didn't like that outcome,
Speaker 2: and offer immediately offered an assurance saying, well, we won't
Speaker 2: place him in particular prison conditions. We weren't able to
Speaker 2: test that assurance in court, and it was waved through
Speaker 2: by the British judges, and then all of a sudden,
Speaker 2: his extradition was ordered by the Home Secretary. We then
Speaker 2: had to appeal, saying you can't extradute him in these circumstances,
Speaker 2: and we re enlivened all of our earlier appeal grounds
Speaker 2: about political opinion, about free speech, about the risk to
Speaker 2: be subjected to the death penalty, all of these issues
Speaker 2: that weren't properly that we say weren't properly determined before
Speaker 2: we got a judgment in March, and in that judgment,
Speaker 2: the court rejected all of our grounds bar three, so
Speaker 2: we were given provisional leave to appeal in respect of
Speaker 2: three grounds. First, the fact that Julian, as an Australian
Speaker 2: journalist and citizen, could be subjected to the death penalty
Speaker 2: on the basis of the facts in the indictment as
Speaker 2: charged if he was extradized to the United States and
Speaker 2: the US had not offered any kind of assurance against that,
Speaker 2: which is completely routine in cases like this. The second
Speaker 2: two grounds are connected that he's an Australian citizen and
Speaker 2: that as an Australian citizen and foreign journalist, once extradized
Speaker 2: to the United States, the US is going to argue
Speaker 2: that he does not get free speech constitutional protections under
Speaker 2: the First Amendment as a foreigner.
Speaker 3: Into that first ground again, that became he's an Australian citizen.
Speaker 3: He can't rely on the same defenses as his US
Speaker 3: citizen counterparts if they were in the same situation as him.
Speaker 3: So he's been given another and.
Speaker 2: We said you can't extradite on the basis that it
Speaker 2: would be a grave violation of his free speech and
Speaker 2: discriminating against him on the basis of his Australian nationality.
Speaker 2: The problem is with the assurance on First Amendment. What
Speaker 2: the US said is once he's in the United States,
Speaker 2: he can seek to rely in court on the First Amendment.
Speaker 2: But it's a matter for the court citicide. So as
Speaker 2: the US government, we can't bind the judiciary on what
Speaker 2: they're going to decide. So for Julian publishing information, receiving
Speaker 2: and publishing information outside the US, there is a very
Speaker 2: real risk that he will be denied First Amendment protections
Speaker 2: and the assurance that the US gave, we say is
Speaker 2: no assurance at all. This argument was heard last night
Speaker 2: and the court agreed with us and said this is
Speaker 2: a real problem. You haven't offered us any satisfactory answers
Speaker 2: to this. We're going to list this for an appeal
Speaker 2: hearing later in the year.
Speaker 5: Two of Britain's most senior judges were comfortable the Wiki
Speaker 5: League's founder wouldn't face the death penalty, but weren't convinced
Speaker 5: he'd be guaranteed the same free speech protections as a
Speaker 5: US citizen.
Speaker 2: So it doesn't mean that he's protected from extradition. It
Speaker 2: just means that we will now have a full appeal
Speaker 2: hearing on this question of as an Australian journalist, will
Speaker 2: he get First Amendment protections and is there any assurance
Speaker 2: that can protect him against the risk he won't.
Speaker 1: So, just going back to what was said in court
Speaker 1: last night and kind of exploring that a little bit more,
Speaker 1: the assurances that were given by the US, Is there
Speaker 1: any assurance at all that would sage the concerns, like,
Speaker 1: is there anything that they could say that, from your perspective,
Speaker 1: would make it an okay thing for him to then
Speaker 1: face trial in the US.
Speaker 2: Absolutely not. We don't accept the assurance that they've given
Speaker 2: about prison conditions, and from my point of view, there
Speaker 2: is no satisfactory assurance. The US government cannot, on the
Speaker 2: state of US law, cannot tell us that he will
Speaker 2: definitely be allowed to rely on the First Amendment. And
Speaker 2: then we have broader concerns in that at all, because
Speaker 2: even if he's extradited and they say, well, yes, you
Speaker 2: can rely on the First Amendment, how long will it
Speaker 2: take for him to go through the US legal system
Speaker 2: to get to the Supreme Court where we can have
Speaker 2: that constitutional fight. This could go on for years. And
Speaker 2: this is why I call it punishment by process because
Speaker 2: he's not been convicted of anything in the United States.
Speaker 2: He's been in a high security prison for five years.
Speaker 2: He was in the equator in embassy for seven and
Speaker 2: a half years before that, protecting him from this very outcome.
Speaker 2: And so what we're saying is is this, this is
Speaker 2: setting a dangerous precedent, not just for him, but for
Speaker 2: every journalist and editor anywhere in the world. It should
Speaker 2: never have been brought. It's a Trump administration indictment. The
Speaker 2: Obama administration chose not to pursue it. The Biden administration
Speaker 2: is allowing this to happen and has the power to
Speaker 2: put it to an end. It is criminalizing public interest journalism.
Speaker 2: It has been warned by the New York Times and
Speaker 2: the Washington Post that it's criminalizing the publicutrist journalist to
Speaker 2: practice they engage in all day, every day. And I
Speaker 2: think it's having a huge shilling effect on national security reporting.
Speaker 2: So for all these reasons, we've got a Biden administration
Speaker 2: who says they support press freedom, who says they won't
Speaker 2: prosecute the media, and yet are allowing this prosecution of
Speaker 2: Julian Assange to continue.
Speaker 1: After the break, what it's like visiting Assange inside Bell
Speaker 1: Maarsh prison, Jennifer, when did you last see Julian Massange?
Speaker 2: I saw him just before I left the United Kingdom.
Speaker 2: I've been back in Australia for work reasons, including working
Speaker 2: on his case here working with the Australian government. So
Speaker 2: I saw him last month and I speak to him
Speaker 2: on the phone every day.
Speaker 1: Tell me about the last time you saw him. Take
Speaker 1: us there with you.
Speaker 2: It's really awful going to bell Marsh, So people need
Speaker 2: to understand. It's this high the high security prison in
Speaker 2: the UK, in sort of fart south east London. It
Speaker 2: is dismal to go there. So imagine London on a
Speaker 2: dreary day and having to go out to bell Marsh.
Speaker 2: When I go there, I have to go through so
Speaker 2: much security. I'm fingerprinted, I get you know, I get frisked,
Speaker 2: they go through my papers. All I can take in
Speaker 2: is like a little bit of money to buy him
Speaker 2: some the best healthy food I can get in the
Speaker 2: prison cafe. I buy him a kit kat and some fruit,
Speaker 2: trying to give him some vitamins. And I have to
Speaker 2: sort of go through to this legal consultation area where
Speaker 2: I pass people who have been convicted of murder and
Speaker 2: rape and terrorism offenses to go and see an Australian
Speaker 2: An Award winning Australian publisher and journalist who's been nominated
Speaker 2: for the Nobel Peace Prize every year since he made
Speaker 2: these publications. That other reason he's in that prison cell.
Speaker 2: I've been his lawyer for fourteen years. I've been visiting
Speaker 2: him in bell Marsh for five and a half years.
Speaker 2: You have to constantly resist the normalization of this situation
Speaker 2: because what does this say about our democracy? What does
Speaker 2: it say about the United Kingdom? What does it say
Speaker 2: about the US? What does it say about Australia, What
Speaker 2: does it say about our relationships? Honestly, in years to come,
Speaker 2: people will look back on this case and the fact
Speaker 2: that I had to go to a high security prison
Speaker 2: to visit an award winning Australian journalist for years on end.
Speaker 2: People will think, how on earth did this take so long?
Speaker 2: How did this happen, and how did it take so
Speaker 2: long to resolve?
Speaker 1: Talk to me about the first time he went and
Speaker 1: visited him in that prison five years ago, and when
Speaker 1: he walked in, what he looked like compared to what
Speaker 1: he looks like when he walks in now.
Speaker 2: I remember when he was dragged out of the Ecuadorian
Speaker 2: embassy again. I'd been seeing him in the embassy at
Speaker 2: least a couple of times a week in London for
Speaker 2: the seven and a half years he was there, and
Speaker 2: so for me, I sort of the slow decline you
Speaker 2: don't notice as much. And then everybody was shocked when
Speaker 2: they saw him dragged out, but I again, it had
Speaker 2: become so normalized that he looked like this. So think
Speaker 2: back to how we looked five and a half years ago,
Speaker 2: and imagine five and a half more years in prison
Speaker 2: and the impact that that has on a person. He
Speaker 2: is incredibly unwell. You know, I'm really worried about him.
Speaker 2: I don't want to disclose too much of his medical situation,
Speaker 2: but what we can say is that he is in
Speaker 2: a very difficult situation. He has regular mental health support.
Speaker 2: He was not well enough to turn up to court
Speaker 2: this week, and that's part of the reason why we're
Speaker 2: pushing so hard to try and get a resolution to
Speaker 2: this case, to bring it to an end, because they're
Speaker 2: stealing his life and his health.
Speaker 1: You're back here in Australia at the moments, and you
Speaker 1: said you're back here in part because of him. Have
Speaker 1: you been meeting with the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister
Speaker 1: or their representatives since you've been back.
Speaker 2: I'm in regular contact with Australian government officials, with our
Speaker 2: Attorney General, with our Prime Minister, and with our ambassador
Speaker 2: in DC, and we are continually trying to work with
Speaker 2: them to resolve the case. We are very grateful to
Speaker 2: our Prime Minister, to Prime Minster Albanesi, who's the first
Speaker 2: Australian Prime minister to speak out in support of Julia,
Speaker 2: to take the principal decision that he has taken to
Speaker 2: try and help us to resolve it, and it's the
Speaker 2: right one, and we are very grateful to him for
Speaker 2: what he's doing. We know that he's raised it at
Speaker 2: the highest levels. And the question now is what will
Speaker 2: the United States do with this. We have the Australian
Speaker 2: people in support, We've got the Australian Parliament and support.
Speaker 2: We've got the Australian government and support. We've got Latin
Speaker 2: American leaders, so I've just in Chile, we've had the
Speaker 2: President of Mexico, the president of Brazil. Lula was out
Speaker 2: last night tweeting saying, you know, Julian should have received
Speaker 2: a Pulitzer for these publications, not been a high security prison,
Speaker 2: and it's time he's released and he's right, and so
Speaker 2: the question is how much more political pressure needs to
Speaker 2: be brought to bear before this absolutely absurd, an abhorrent
Speaker 2: case is put to an end. So what happens from here, Well,
Speaker 2: we start preparing for the appeal, so there'll be some
Speaker 2: back and forth between the parties this week to determine
Speaker 2: a timetable for the hearing. We'll have to wait to
Speaker 2: get a court listing, but typically in these cases it
Speaker 2: could be it could be months. It could be six
Speaker 2: months that we're waiting for a court listing, so six
Speaker 2: months longer that he will be in prison. And so
Speaker 2: we continue to do our public advocacy calling on the
Speaker 2: US to drop the case because, of course the only
Speaker 2: reason he's in Belmarsh right now is because of this
Speaker 2: US extradition request. We don't know what's going to happen
Speaker 2: with the US election, we don't know what will be
Speaker 2: what political situation will be looking at after the US election,
Speaker 2: and it's urgent. This is his health, this is the
Speaker 2: life of an Australian citizen, it's a life of an
Speaker 2: award winning Walkley Award winning Australian journalist, and it deserves
Speaker 2: more urgency than that. And the u S election should
Speaker 2: not be sort of dictating the schedule. It should be
Speaker 2: more urgent than that. If we're successful, this will protect
Speaker 2: other journalists and editors from going through the same proceedings
Speaker 2: that Julian has been through. But at what cost to
Speaker 2: Julian Assange? That's my question. Why should you spend five
Speaker 2: to ten years maybe longer in a prison to protect
Speaker 2: these press freedoms. That's too much to ask of one person.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much for your time, Jim.
Speaker 2: Oh Problem, happy to chat to you.
Speaker 1: Also in the news today, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin net
Speaker 1: Nyahu has condemned the International Criminal Courts Prosecutor for seeking
Speaker 1: arrest warrants for himself and to his defense minister alongside
Speaker 1: her mass leaders. The Chief ICZ Prosecutor, Karim Khan, says
Speaker 1: there are reasonable grounds to believe that mister Ntnyahu and
Speaker 1: Defense Minister yo Iv Gallant bear criminal responsibility for alleged
Speaker 1: war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza and the
Speaker 1: Australian government has sent two flights to New Caledonia to
Speaker 1: evacuate stranded Australian tourists amid violent protests across the country.
Speaker 1: At least three hundred Australian travelers have been stuck in
Speaker 1: the French Pacific territory since the eruption of deadly riots
Speaker 1: that have triggered a state of emergency. It's all from
Speaker 1: us for today. Thanks for your company. We'll see you
Speaker 1: again tomorrow