The fourth and final day of the first half Julian Assange’s extradition hearing saw a blazing debate as to whether international law supersedes English law or visa versa. The conclusion was a dramatic rejection by the judge of a simple request. The request was simply for Assange to be allowed to sit with his lawyers in order to communicate with them and not behind a glass screen.
The day was expected to begin with Judge Vanessa Baraitser considering an application by the defence for Assange to sit on the benches with his lawyers. To that point, Mr Assange has been flanked in his glass booth and has unable to communicate with his team or hear proceedings properly. However, the court offered Assange headphones to help him hear. He took the headset and Edward Fitzgerald QC for the defence said they would “give it a try”.
James Lewis QC for the USA stated on Wednesday that English law contains no exception to extradition for “political offenses” and that this trumps international law. The defence has argued that a 2003 US-UK extradition treaty do prevent extradition for political offenses and that this is more relevant to Mr Assange’s case.
The matter was not spoken of again until Fitzgerald rose for the defence just before midday. The defence stated that it accepted that the extradition treaty is not domestic law but said the European Convention on Human rights is. At this point, Judge Baraitser asked Fitzgerald if he was just arguing “in circles.” Mr Fitzgerald argued that the US was engaging in “abuse of process” with the extradition request and that the courts had the powers to rule on that. He pointed to a previous case wherein the US tried to extradite a US citizen on tax evasion charges, and it was denied on “abuse of process” grounds.
Following the long lunch break, Mark Summers QC rose for the defence and told the court that the headset Mr Assange had been given was not a solution to the problem of him being unable to hear and communicate with his team. Mr Summer argued that the glass dock in which Assange was sitting presented numerous logistical issues and cited a report which concluded that these circumstances were interfering with Mr Assange’s right to a fair trial.
This resulted in Mr Assange himself to rising from his seat to complain further. Judge Baraitser warned him to sit back down and speak through his lawyers. “I can’t,” he said. She told him to put his hand up if he wanted to attract the attention of his team, Summers complained that since Assange was behind him, he couldn’t see when he had his hand up. Mr Assange is a non-violent intellectual and it seems strange to not let him sit with his.
Even when reminded of Assange’s “particular vulnerability” and mental health issues Judge Baraitser did not back down and refused the request for him to leave the dock. Surprisingly, the US prosecution maintained a “neutral” approach and did not object to the prospect of Assange sitting with his lawyers, but it made no difference. The case is now expected to resume for a case management hearing on April 7 before the second full part of the trial expected in May or June.
Current Affairs Correspondent | My name is Oliver Down I am 22, and a staunch brexiteer. I am a Bristolian lad who studied politics in Leicester. I believe in free speech and accurate journalism and I won’t be afraid to give you “the other side” of the story!
[sibwp_form id=4]
