Why Julian Assange’s Case Matters for Journalists Worldwide

Picture of Julian AssangePhoto byWikimedia Commons

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has now spent so many years in jail that it’s increasingly difficult to remember why he’s there.

He’s been incarcerated in London’s Belmarsh prisonsince 2019. He’s been held there while the United States sought his extraditionon charges of publishingclassified information. Before that, he spent sevenyears in the Ecuadorian embassy(also in London),seeking asylum to avoid being extradited to Sweden to face a sexual assault investigation and charges. Those charges were eventually dropped.

Just recently, Assange and his defense team won an important victory: he’s been granted the right to appeal his removal to the United States.

It may be a victory, but Assange still remains in prison,and his case remains an important one for all journalists and free-speech advocates to know something about. If he’s ever removed to the United States to face a trial, he may be the first journalist or publisher to go to jail for sharing information that is “in the public interest.”

A summary of Assange’s last (nearly) twenty years

Assange’s legal troubles began, although he couldn’t know it then, when he helped found the website WikiLeaks in 2006. Although not considered (at that time) to be a typical news organization, WikiLeaks took as its mission the publication of restricted and secret information that would revealillegalities, corruption, and war crimesall over the world.

WikiLeaks became infamous in 2010, when it shared, online, a classified U.S.militaryvideo showing a 2007 incident when11 civilians were killed in Baghdad by the U.S. military. This video and thousands of other documents were provided to Assange and WikiLeaks by an army intelligence analyst named Chelsea Manning. Manning herself would go on to be charged under the Espionage Act (for revealing classified information) and spend years in prison.

Eventually Assange would also be charged with 17 counts against the 1917 Espionage Act and “one count of ‘conspiracy to commit computer intrusion” forpublishing Manning’s disclosures.

Along the way, Assange would also face charges of sexual assault.He maintained his innocence against those charges and first claimed asylum in the embassy for the country of Ecuador to avoid being extradited to Swedenfor that trial. Eventually the officials in the Ecuadorian embassy evicted Assange and he was taken into custody to await extradition to the United States.Since 2019, he’s been in prison inLondon.

But what does all of this mean for free speech rights and journalism?

Assange will continue his legal fight to appeal against Great Britain’s decision to approve his extradition to the United States. It’s expected that his team will focus on the point that Assange would not receive the full protection of First Amendment rights to free speech because he’s an Australian citizen, not a citizen of the United States.

The elephant in the room is that, even if Assange were a citizen of the United States, being prosecuted under the Espionage Act makes it difficult to enjoy the protection of the First Amendment. The Act has been in place since 1917, and carries severe penalties for those who reveal secret and classified government information.

People charged with offenses under the Espionage Act are not allowed to explain to a jury why they revealed classified information.Whistleblowers such as Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden, and Reality Winner (as well as countless others) have all stated that they revealed classified information becausethey believedthe American public had a right to knowwhat their government was doing.

Free-speech advocates and journalism activists alike have raised very vocal concerns that threatening Assange with up to 175 years in prison as a punishment will have a “chilling effect” on news stories being published in the American and world press. These editorial professionals are going on record to say that“holding governments accountableis part of the core mission of a free press in a democracy.”

Don’t lose sight of the free speech forest for the security trees

Proponents of the use of the Espionage Act to prosecute leakers of national and classified secret information will often tell citizens that they’re using the Act to protect national security.

National security is a valid concern and must always be taken seriously. However, it should be noted that in many cases, those who leak information they believe the public has a right to knowoften do so without causing danger to others. The U.S. Department of Defense, for instance, has since released a report saying that Chelsea Manning’s disclosures (the ones Assange is still being prosecuted for publishing) “did not cause any real harm to U.S. interests.”

Julian Assange’s legal cases have been long and complex and have been complicated by other issues, including the troubling sexual assault charges that were also once brought against him.

Butcitizens of the world must decide if they believe in the importance of free speech and the job of journalists and publishers to tell them what governments and militaries are doing. If they do, they might want to learn more aboutAssange, free speech rights, and the role of journalism in modern society.