DANGEROUS DETENTION: JULIAN ASSANGE IN BELMARSH PRISON

October 6, 2019 – 5:08 am

HOW TO DONATE

Our costs will always be there. So readers who can donate towards the cost of the site, please open a Skrill account. Readers who wish to contribute to BigO will now have to use Skrill (click here). We are no longer able to use PayPal to receive donations. Register an account at Skrill. To make a payment, use this e-mail address as recipient’s e-mail address in Skrill: mail2[at]bigomagazine.com. Looking forward to hearing from you.

+ + + + +

JUST TO LET YOU KNOW
To reduce spamming, the BigO website is going through Cloudflare. What it does is scan your browser to ensure the visitor is not a spam. Do not be alarmed as this usually takes only a few seconds. Email us if you still have difficulty accessing the BigO site; or playing or downloading the tracks. If you know a better way of reducing spam, do let us know.

+ + + + +


Don’t forget Julian Assange. He’s still in prison. By Binoy Kampmark.

Much ink has been spilt in textbooks describing situations where autocratic states can behave badly. They abuse rights; they ignore international law and they ride roughshod over conventions. Liberal democracies may boast that they follow matters to the letter of the law, and make sure that citizens are given their fair and just cause in putting forth their cases. The practice suggests all too glaringly that the opposite is true.

The English legal tradition, with its historically brutal punishments, adoration of the fetish known as the rule of law, and a particular tendency towards a miscarriage of justice, has found a rich target in Julian Assange. Behind the stiffness of procedure and the propriety of convention, cruelties are being justified with grinding regularity.

On September 22, Assange would have been released from HMP Belmarsh, a maximum security centre whose reputation betrays much in the way the authorities wish to handle the publisher. The 50-week jail term imposed for skipping bail was a mild matter relative to others serving life sentences in the prison, but a statement had to be made both to those wishing to emulate Assange and Britain’s cousins across the Atlantic.

But that term of imprisonment was never meant to be genuinely observed in the scheme of things; its termination merely being a point in a broader scheme of ongoing detention. It was a mere hiccup in a conversation which involves US power. The Washington security establishment is salivating for its quarry, and Britain is playing minder.

This means keeping him in indefinite detention, or at least till US authorities make their case, however unconvincing. At the Westminster Magistrates court hearing on September 13, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser was short and sharp. “You have been produced today because your sentence of imprisonment is about to come to an end. When that happens your remand status changes from serving prisoner to a person facing extradition.”

The English legal tradition, with its historically brutal punishments, adoration of the fetish known as the rule of law, and a particular tendency towards a miscarriage of justice, has found a rich target in Julian Assange. Behind the stiffness of procedure and the propriety of convention, cruelties are being justified with grinding regularity.

The District Judge explained how she had given Assange’s lawyer “an opportunity to make an application for bail on your behalf and she has declined to do so, perhaps not surprising in light of your history of absconding in these proceedings.” In that explanation, a cosmos of meaning can be discerned. Any application for bail would have been futile in any case, given that the judge had made up her mind. “In my view I have substantial ground for believing if I release you, you will abscond again.”

The judge was also being more than a touch disingenuous. The hearing could not, in any genuine way, be described as a bail hearing, despite being represented as such. It was, in fact, a technical hearing, meaning that the magistrate had effectively refused bail even before a formal request by the defence. Such tendencies towards premature adjudication do not do the legal profession proud.

The curious reference to “these proceedings” suggested a continuum of prosecution against Assange conflating both Swedish and US attempts to extradite him. His punishment for skipping bail was not connected to the current US case, at least directly, but avoiding the extradition to Sweden in an attempt to question him over allegations of sexual assault.

To the judicial officer, it was all the same picture of reason, the same cheek shown in avoiding the inevitable. Never mind that Assange exercised his rights to asylum, that the reason he fled to the Ecuadorean embassy in 2012 was based on a genuine, and now proven fear, that he could be extradited to the United States to face charges with a cumulative prison time of 175 years. Best bang him up in the cells as a warmer for the US effort, which is set to gather steam for a February extradition hearing.

While Britain continues its immolating ritual in how it leaves the European Union, there are murmurings of protest keeping the matter of Assange’s fate alive. On Saturday, a modest protest took place outside Belmarsh, sporting the staple banners: “Don’t shoot the messenger”; “Free, free Julian Assange”; “Hands off Assange”.

Labour MP Chris Williamson said: “We have a moral duty to fight for Julian Assange, whose only crime is to expose war crimes by the US and the abuse of state powers.”

Labour MP Chris Williamson was on hand to address those gathered. “Here we have a situation where someone who we should be celebrating is facing solitary confinement, which is tantamount to torture taking place on British soil. This cannot be allowed to stand.”

Williamson’s rationale is based on a traditional suspicion of the overreach of US power, and not a view shared by the mainstream plodders in British politics. “We have a moral duty to fight for Julian Assange, whose only crime is to expose war crimes by the US and the abuse of state powers.”

Williamson has also made the observation that his country has become rather slapdash with its application of legal principle, despite taking some historical pride in defending human rights. “Britain is increasingly behaving like a tin-pot dictatorship in its dealing with him.” While Assange suffers, British politicians, notably those in Camp Brexit, see only one dictatorship: the EU. Their idea of the Sceptred Isle remains pure.

There are accounts about Assange’s failing health that jab and trigger the occasional splash of publicity. Assange’s father, John Shipton, has described how, during a visit in August, his son looked “a bit shaky, and is suffering from anxiety. He has lost a lot of weight. It is very distressing, and the intensity of his treatment has increased over the past year.”

The UN Special Rapporteur, Nils Melzer, has also issued stirring assessments of Assange’s detention, with its compounding cruelties. “In 20 years of work with victims of war, violence and political prosecution, I have never seen a group of democratic states gang up to deliberately isolate, demonise and abuse a single individual for such a long time and with so little regard for human dignity and the rule of law. The collective punishment of Julian Assange must end here and now.” Sadly, and depressingly for publishers, the process continues, wearingly and destructively.

Note: Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email him here. The above article was posted at CounterPunch.

+ + + + +

  1. 8 Responses to “DANGEROUS DETENTION: JULIAN ASSANGE IN BELMARSH PRISON”

  2. You can count on bigo bashing the western world and making a hero out of a treasonous criminal.

    By Mark on Oct 6, 2019

  3. Lol! One day a lot of these world leaders will be seen, retrospectively of course, as the greatest traitors of all. By then, of course, it will be too late. The true champions of humanity have been murdered by the state and its agents for thousands of years. It would be against the grain for them to treat these people any differently now.

    By Trevor on Oct 6, 2019

  4. Is the author suggesting that, if granted bail, Assange would NOT have absconded? Or that he deserved to be given the chance to escape trial again? Or what?\

    Assange is self-seeking, self-serving and arrogant, and seems blithely unaware or careless of the huge damage done by his slapdash meddling. If I’m wrong, let’s hear it in a court.

    By Gareth on Oct 7, 2019

  5. Assange is a criminal, and the author wishes for him to escape so he can meddle in American affairs again. We wouldn’t have Trump in the White House right now if not for Assange coordinating with Russia and leaking the DNC’s stolen emails to make Hillary look bad. He never released one email or anything from Trump. He has published top secret documents and endangered many peoples lives, while he benefits. Wikileaks is his political machine and he alone decides who he will make look bad. He is self-serving and arrogant. He treated the Ecuadorian Embassy and their people terribly, which is why they told him to get out. I say bring him over here to stand trial and if he’s innocent he can walk, and if he’s guilty he can rot in prison until he’s dead.

    By Big Dave on Oct 8, 2019

  6. Hey Big Dave- How does he benefit? He’s been locked up for many years…..

    By Trevor on Oct 9, 2019

  7. Trevor, not quite ‘locked up’. He fled certain imprisonment, and holed himself up in a London embassy, until even his hosts tired of his idiocy and personal unpleasantness, and invited the local police in to come and take him away. He sought to evade the criminal consequences of his actions, thought he’d found a willing dupe, and then pissed them off. Not quite ‘locked up’, merely a failed publicity stunt - like everything else he has done.

    By Gareth on Oct 10, 2019

  8. I don’t think you’d see it that way if it was you that had to go through all of that.

    By Trevor on Oct 11, 2019

  9. Defenders of war criminals never tire of bashing a publisher whose biggest transgression seems to be exposing the truth.

    By proudfootz on Oct 13, 2019

Post a Comment