Friday, June 21, 2013

i am not a legal proffesional but... in the case of human rights abuse of julian assange

I am not a legal expert or lawyer, and my knowledge of legal procedure is little to none, & limited to research I did in regard of personal issues regarding infringements of my own rights by Representative Agencies of the UK government, police & legal system. 

However,
Having researched many areas of social policy, human rights as part of my uncompleted BA studies in Health & social care & social policy I am convinced that in regard of The Human Rights Act 1998, the Rights of Julian Assange have been flagrantly breached and indeed abused.

It's fair to say I lost my battle for justice, I believe, purely as a result of my personal financial restrictions, ( I couldn't afford to take civil action, was denied legal aid for the final stages of the case in hand and told by more than 1 lawyer I had little chance of success against  those I was taking actions against) 

I was unable to find pro bono representation and frankly, with the little knowledge and support, I felt I had little recourse to continue, so many loopholes to jump through in law, and to many people that had special handshakes and degrees of kinship of the masonic variety, amongst those who had abused my rights .

Did I give up? well lets just say, I am not dead yet, and there is always a to be continued option.
 

I did manage to "win" when  I presented my case evidence myself at the criminal compensation tribunal stage, although frankly, it felt I was defending myself when I was in fact the victim and I was still penalized and compensated financially only for the physical damage long since healed though the metal and emotional damage that was ignored, remains.
None of that  is relevant to what I wish to discuss now, which is the abuse of the rights of Julian Assange and why I think it is so very important that people are aware not only of his predicament and case but the relevance it has to us all in the future in regard of our civil liberties and human rights.
Julian Assange is presently a political refugee in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where he was granted political asylum on 16th August 2012, having entered the Embassy seeking asylum on June 19th 2012 in fear of his live after threats & calls from varies high ranking political, military & media figures representing or with links to the American government, for his assassination, and or act of violence against him, 


 including former Governor of the state of Alaska Sarah Palin, American-born author, conservative political activist & political science professor Tom Flanagan, who also served as adviser to Canadian prime minister Stephen Harper until 2004, Fox news political anchors Bill O'Reilly & Megyn Kelly, Eric Bolling Fox News commentator,Jeffrey Kuhner Washington Times columnist,Ralph Peters U.S. Army Lieutenant Colonel and author,G. Gordon Liddy Former White House Adviser, talk show host,Deroy Murdock Columnist for National Review,Mike Huckabee
Former Governor of Arkansas and Fox News talk show host.

 

Indeed, Hilary Clinton who was the US Secretary of state at the time of the Wikileaks exposure of the Collateral murder video, Afghan war logs & cable-gate leaks stated on CNN that the American government would take AGGRESSIVE steps to hold responsible those who "stole "the information, Clinton was also reported in "Internet Chronicle" by Frank Mason as having said
 

“I want his balls,I want his dick. On my desk, I mean I want it severed and put on ice so I can ride it – I mean throw it from the window of a moving limousine. Assange is a threat to our freedoms and a menace on society.”

Let there be no mistake that I believe that these people have as much right to freedom of  speech & expression as I, you or indeed Julian Assange do,
However, it is also my believe that for people who hold in their hands the power to influence public opinion,making such public statements of incitement to violence serves to Prove that Julian Assange had ever reason to fear for his life and that his life was indeed at risk of harm or danger of death by murder /violent aggressive act and as such he was correct to seek asylum in regard of human rights act 1998 schedule 1 articles Article 2 Right to life, which states;

1. Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.

Julian Assange has not been convicted of a crime in the UK or else where and

 under UK law a person is innocent until proven guilty by a court of law ( article 6 (2)human rights act ).

Therefore, he has a right to protection by law from any one threatening his life on the basis of allegations of any unproven criminal behaviors or hearsay  he is accused of that has not been subject to judicial review or judgment & conviction.

Article 3  Prohibition of torture No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Julian Assange has been subjected to degrading treatment in the UK by the conditions set by his bail restrictions pending the results of the extradition request of the Swedish prosecutions on the grounds of allegations he is requested to answer on, NOT CHARGES &not allegations, that would apply under UK law as representing criminal behavior.

The conditions of his bail demanded the restriction of his freedom, curfew between specific time frames and the wearing of a tracking device. All conditions that would be considered degrading to someone who has not been convicted of any crime and who has in fact complied with all requests and conditions despite having not been convicted or proven to have committed a crime .

 These bail conditions, in fact, in relation to a extradition request 
 a request the UK government is under no obligation to grant with out justifiable reason,

That the Swedish prosecution has insisted on extradition to question Mr Assange, despite the offer of co operation to the questioning of Assange in the UK, either prior to his seeking asylum, in person in the UK,  or by video link or conference call, or at the Ecuadorian embassy after asylum was granted, beggars believe, which of course poses the question why are the Swedish prosecution so unwilling to question him anywhere but in Sweden when they have questioned suspected murderers outside of Sweden.

I believe that for anyone, these restrictions, as set by Assanges bail conditions represent restriction of freedom without proven crime ( innocent till proven guilty)and wearing of a tracking device like an animal are degrading and mentally torturous.
These issues further reflected as breaches of Julian Assanges human rights .

Article 5 Right to liberty and security which states
 

1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:

(a) the lawful detention of a person after conviction by a competent court;

 Assange has not been convicted of any crime
 

b) the lawful arrest or detention of a person for non-compliance with the lawful order of a court or in order to secure the fulfillment of any obligation prescribed by law; 

Assange complied with request made of him regarding  all issues pertaining to the Swedish allegations and conditions set out by UK courts pending extradition hearing. Additionally Assange had compiled with the Swedish court prior to his departure from Sweden & had been informed that he was free to leave the country.

(c)the lawful arrest or detention of a person effected for the purpose of bringing him before the competent legal authority on reasonable suspicion of having committed an offense or when it is reasonably considered necessary to prevent his committing an offense or fleeing after having done so; Assange complied again.

f)the lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorized entry into the country or of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition.

Assange's request for asylum came after extradition hearing, and by then it was clearly reflected that 
1. he would not get a fair hearing in Sweden
2. his life was at risk of harm and safety to his person.

Article 6 Right to a fair trial which states;
 

1.the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgment shall be pronounced publicly but the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or to the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.

In regard of the Assange case the Swedish Prime Minister & other official bodies have spoken publicly in a manner that could prejudiced the case against Assange, this is in addition to the public calls and charges of US officials and TV personalities who have made character assassinations and politically motivated attacks on Assange that could influence and bias his entitlement to a fair trial.
Which proves further breach of his human rights under this article.(6)

2 Everyone charged with a criminal offense shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
Assange has never been charged but has been presumed guilty by many on the basis of US allegations of espionage unproven but cited previously with supporting evidence referenced previously.

( since I originally wrote this blog these aligations of espionage & aiding the enemy have been shown to be unfinded as pertaining to evidence & verdicts in the trail of Bradly Manning.)

Now the issue becomes 2 fold as we deal with allegations in US & Sweden.

3 Everyone charged with a criminal offense has the following minimum rights:
 

(a)to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;

In  regard of Allegations made by US officials, no charges have been officially recorded although their is evidence to support that a secret grand jury indictment has been made pending extradition to US from Sweden or UK if made,
& Swedish prosecutor Marian NY has failed and indeed put up barriers relating to questioning Assange anywhere but Sweden on allegations of sexual misbehavior's unsubstantiated and without charges being made to date.

 I have written in detail about the sexual misconduct allegations b4 and will again but that is not the focus of this blogg.However suffice to say allegations of rape are always an emotive subject and rape is, as an allegation against someone an issue that is sure to incite negative feeling toward the alleged perpetrator.

(b)to have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defense;
 

(c)to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;
 

(d)to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;
e)to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.


Article 7 No punishment without law  states;
 

1. No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offense on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offense under national or international law at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the criminal offense was committed.

The conditions of Julian Assanges bail in regard of the pending extradition hearing saw Julian forced to wear a tracking device, and have his freedoms subject of curfew by time limitations and restrictions . These are conditions usually enforced when someone has been charged & conflicted of a crime who has either been bailed on license after conviction  but without imprisonment, or after serving a term in jail, and is therefore part of their punishment.
Julian Assange has therefore been treated as someone charged with a criminal offense, which he has not been charged with, and punished for a crime or crimes he has not been proven to have committed.

2.This Article shall not prejudice the trial and punishment of any person for any act or omission which, at the time when it was committed, was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by civilized nations.

Article 8 Right to respect for private and family life
 

1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
 

2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
 

Julian Assange has not been convicted of any crime in the UK or elsewhere, however, as a result of unsubstantiated & unproven allegations against him in Sweden & the USA he has been subjected to not only restrictions on his private life but his family life which reflects members of his family are also being subjected to infringement of their  right to respect for a private family life.

These are breeches of Assanges rights in regard of article 8 are supported by  facts regarding the limitations on his freedoms by curfews and bail conditions before seeking asylum, and since, by the restrictions that his political asylum deems he must endure to ensure his safety from risk of harm and acts of violence in regard of the threats and calls for his assassination previously mentioned that deem him unable to live in conditions that would normally be recognized as normal private family life.

It is also prevalent to consider at this point in reference to article 8 the social health implications that can impact on all family members as a result of the restrictions of respect for family life.

The  living conditions Julian Assange is having to live with as a political refugee in the Ecuadorian Embassy prevent him from going outside in relation to safety issues. This means his exposure to sunlight is restricted as indeed is his exposure to fresh air. These conditions can have impact on physical health & well being as well as impact on emotional and mental health.

In addition the conditions he is subjected to obviously are stressful for him but also put a great deal of stress on his family and these could lead to depression and indeed physical health conditions such as heart attack or stroke. I make these point in regard of right to private family live and the health implications as a matter of relevance particularly on two counts

1. Assange has not been charged with any crime and therefore should not be subject to restrictions on his private family life as a result of hearsay and allegations of unproven criminality &

2. because of the impact on family menders resulting from the restrictions resulting from the need for asylum as is presently presented in the confines of the Embassy and the fact that Mr Assanges asylum in Ecuador were safe passage granted would not restrict his ability to conduct his private family life in a more normal way , which would elevate some of the other issues that impact on Mr Assange and his family as a result of both his political profile and career but also the unproven allegations against him.

Article 10 Freedom of expression
 

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
 

2.The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.

Julian Assange is a journalist and his career demand he practice his right to freedom of speech and expression.

Julian Assange faces allegations of espionage and endangering public safety despite not having been proven to have taken anything unlawfully or threatening or indeed inciting violence or crimes against other members of humanity .

Julian Assange exposed crimes against humanity, corruption, and international mal- practices by government and corporate industries as a journalist. This is his job.

The job of a journalist is to inform the public of issues of interest and concern to the public.

Journalist receive information from various sources that they then research and investigate and relate to the public through the communications media enviable to them as journalist that is the profession of journalist. The job of a journalist with integrity is to report the truth not propaganda , and to protect its sources .

Julian Assange did everything within the remit of his processional requirements as a journalist.

Julian Assange has not promoted or incited Violence, sold weapons or encouraged criminality he exposed these behaviors by governments and business corporations involved in mal- practices  detrimental to the good of the masses as a result he has been the victim of crimes of incitement of violence against him, disproportionate restrictions on his financial transactions on his business (wikileaks) and human rights abuses as listed.

It is also prevalent to establish that Julian Assange has not been accused of acts of violence or sexual misconduct prior to the Swedish allegations, nor has there been allegations of behaviors that reflect a characteristic pattern associated with sexual misconduct or violent behavior before or since by anyone.

 Article 14 Prohibition of discrimination states;
 

The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, color, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.

Julian Assange has been subject of discrimination as reflected by the impositions imposed by the UK government pending his extradition hearing by the conditions of his bail.

He had not been subject of proven criminality or charged with an offense when forced to wear a tracking device and have his freedoms restricted by time curfew & limitations this reflects discrimination on grounds that as an innocent man( article 6 innocent till proven guilty) he was forced to comply with conditions that other free men unproven to have been involved in criminal behavior would not have to comply with.

Article 16 Restrictions on political activity of aliens states
Nothing in Articles 10, 11 and 14 shall be regarded as preventing the High Contracting Parties from imposing restrictions on the political activity of aliens.
Article 17  Prohibition of abuse of rights states
 

Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the Convention.
 Article 18 Limitation on use of restrictions on rights states
The restrictions permitted under this Convention to the said rights and freedoms shall not be applied for any purpose other than those for which they have been prescribed.


Articles 16, 17&18 refer to issues related to previous artless that have already been explained in relation to the case of Julian Assange and I include them only for reference.

I wrote this blog as a result of a comment on twitter where I stated that I demand safe passage to Ecuador for Julian Assange because I believe his Human rights have been abused. I think I have covered in simple terms the grounds for my allegation. I think I have also explained why these explanations apply and how Julian Assange's rights have been abused.

As I said I am not a legal expert or lawyer I am a lay person.

I will not go into a full breakdown of the allegations related to the Swedish case, I have written on this before and will again in more detail, although details are available on Justice4Assange.com
It was not the purpose of this blog, the purpose here was to cover human right breaches in the case of Julian Assange and since I gave myself a 24 hour window in which to do it I have kept it as simple as possible with limited references in order to reach my self imposed deadline .

I hope it has covered the issues involved adequately and would be grateful to hear any comments or argument against my own argument as presented.

The Ecuadorean government has found that Mr. Assange has justified in his application and through additional material that he has a well-founded fear of political persecution, and risks torture or the death penalty in the United States in connection with the publication of truthful information of matters of interest to the public through his work with WikiLeaks.

references & links

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIpFd6Q9Llk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Flanagan_%28political_scientist%29
http://www.peopleokwithmurderingassange.com/the_list.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OhdXznzEw8
http://www.chronicle.su/society/patriotism/white-house-demands-assange-assassination/
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1
http://justice4assange.com/Allegations.html