Wikileaks founder Julian Assange won the first stage of his battle on Monday to overturn a UK ruling that last December opened the door to his extradition to the United States to stand trial on espionage charges, by obtaining permission from take your case to the British High Court
The High Court in London on Monday authorized Assange to appeal the case to the UK High Court, but the High Court must agree to accept the case before it can go forward.
Assange won another vital stage in his bitter battle to regain his freedom and protect the right to information in a “point of law” of public importance.
“The request of the defense to certify a point of law is admitted”, affirmed the judges in their pronouncement reproduced by the AFP news agency.
The High Court ruled on Monday that there is a moot point of law, allowing Assange to ask the Supreme Court to hear the case.
The point of appeal refers to the “guarantees” given by the United States on how Assange would be treated by the US justice system if he were extradited.
Lord Burnett, Chief Justice, said the case had raised a legal question about the circumstances in which judges received and considered US assurances about how he would be treated in prison.
Assange’s lawyers have 14 days to appeal to the Supreme Court.
The High Court’s ruling is based on a technical problem.
Just over a year ago, a London district court judge rejected a US extradition request on the grounds that Assange was likely to kill himself if held in harsh US prison conditions. Subsequently, the US authorities assured that the founder of WikiLeaks would not face the harsh treatment that, according to his lawyers, would put his physical and mental health at risk.
Last month, the High Court reversed the lower court’s decision, saying the US promises were sufficient to ensure that Assange would be treated humanely.
Those guarantees fThey were the focus of Monday’s High Court ruling.
“Mr. Assange respectfully submits that this Court must certify that this appeal involves points of law of general public importance, in relation to the Court’s approach to safeguards, and that it must also grant leave to appeal to the Supreme Court,” states the court document.
The High Court authorized Assange to appeal so that the Supreme Court can decide “under what circumstances can an appeals court receive guarantees from a requesting state … in extradition proceedings.”
Assange’s lawyers seek to appeal because The United States offered its guarantees after the lower court issued its ruling, arguing that the US government’s promise that the Wikileaks founder will not be subjected to extreme conditions makes no sense because it is conditional and could be changed at the discretion of US authorities.
U.S has called on British authorities to extradite Assange so he can stand trial on 17 counts of espionage and one count of computer misuse linked to WikiLeaks’ publication of thousands of leaked military and diplomatic documents.
Assange, 50, has been held at Belmarsh High Security Prison since 2019.
Before that, he spent seven years locked up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Assange sought protection at the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to face charges of rape and sexual assault.
Sweden abandoned sex crime investigations in November 2019 because too much time had passed.
US prosecutors say Assange illegally helped US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal classified diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks later released, putting lives in danger.
Assange’s lawyers argue that their client should not have been charged because he was acting as a journalist and is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, which guarantees freedom of the press, and they claim that the documents he published exposed US military irregularities. in Iraq and Afghanistan.
