Sophy Ridge on Sunday Interview with Jennifer Robinson, Julian Assange Lawywer

Sunday 14 April 2019

ANY QUOTES MUST BE ATTRIBUTED TO SKY NEWS, SOPHY RIDGE ON SUNDAY

SOPHY RIDGE: Julian Assange faces extradition to the United States after his arrest this week and his case is causing some political waves as well with the Home Secretary likely to be involved in deciding where he ends up. We are joined now by Jennifer Robinson, Mr Assange’s lawyer, thank you very much for being on the programme this morning. A lot of our viewers will be looking at this and thinking this is a man who has been hiding from justice for seven years, why should he be above the law?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: He’s not above the law and the fact is Julian has never been concerned about facing British justice or indeed Swedish justice, this case is and has always been about his concern about being sent to face American injustice. We’ve been warning since 2010 and I’ve been working on his case since the initial Swedish request came through, we’ve been warning since then that he would face the risk of US extradition for actions in his work associated with WikiLeaks publications. We warned for years and that is precisely what has happened, he was right all along and we were right all along to be worried about it. He was granted asylum inside the Ecuadorian Embassy because of his concern about this risk of onward extradition to the United States. He has always co-operated with the Swedish investigation, he remained in Sweden to answer questions, we offered his testimony before they sought his extradition and we continue to offer his testimony. He only sought asylum inside the Ecuadorian Embassy when Sweden refused to give assurances about onward extradition to the United States. That is what he was concerned about. He offered his testimony from inside the Ecuadorian Embassy, the Ecuadorian government sought assurances from Sweden he wouldn’t be sent to the US, those assurances were not forthcoming. Let’s not forget that he actually answered questions from the prosecutors years ago and that was when they decided to drop the investigation in Sweden so there have been no charges in Sweden, he offered his testimony and they decided to drop the case. When the dropped the case he didn’t leave the Embassy so if he had been – all those people are saying he is hiding from Swedish justice, if that had been the case why didn’t he walk out of the Embassy two years ago when his case was dropped?

SR: Okay, well let’s try and unpick some of what you’re saying here because it is quite a complex story and we are talking here about some of the Swedish allegations, really serious allegations, rape, sexual assault. He of course denies them and you say it is all about him wanting, worrying about extradition to the US but at the same time it was the extradition to Sweden that was why he went into the Embassy in the first place because the UK agreed with the extradition to Sweden, two weeks later he went into the Embassy. The US wasn’t on the paper at that point.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: There was a Grand Jury investigation that was opened back in 2010 and we were concerned about the risk of US extradition then. That concern has been proven correct this week …

SR: But shouldn’t he have gone to Sweden to face those allegations?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: We were concerned because Sweden had not provided the assurance against onward extradition, that once in custody he would not be able to seek asylum with respect to the United States. That is why he walked into the Embassy when he did. The asylum that was granted by Ecuador was, with respect, to the risk of being sent to the United States to face prosecution for his publishing activities and for actions associated with that. That is precisely the request that came through this week. Now Ecuador continued to negotiate with Sweden to try to deal with the Swedish investigation and to allow prosecutors to question him so that he could answer the Swedish allegations whilst protecting him from US extradition, that is why he was in the Embassy.

SR: You see you say he has provided testimony, that he has answered the allegations in Sweden but it was on his terms wasn’t it? What does that mean, offer testimony? Does it just mean writing a letter to Sweden because to a lot of people that is not appropriate.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: The Swedish Prosecutor came inside the Ecuadorian Embassy to ask him questions about the case, he gave his testimony and after that they chose to close the investigation. This is a fact that has been completely lost in the discussion about this case over the past couple of weeks. That investigation was closed after hearing his testimony. If they choose to reopen it that is a separate question and we’ll deal with it but we are absolutely happy to answer those queries as and when they come up. The key issue at the moment is US extradition which is what we have warned about for many years.

SR: You see my understanding was that the charges were dropped effectively because he was in the Embassy so to the investigation was dropped in 2017 because they couldn’t formally notify him of the allegations. The molestation charges were dropped in 2015 because time had run out, because he was effectively in the Embassy for seven years so he didn’t have to face up to it. That is what lots of people will be thinking.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: As I have said repeatedly, he has always offered his testimony and offered to co-operate with the Swedish investigation …

SR: But it’s on his terms isn’t it, it’s not what they want.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: In order to protect himself from the very extradition request that was served on him this week, he was right to be concerned about that and that is why he was in the Embassy. This case is and has always been about the risk of extradition to the United States, I think people need to focus on the fact that this indictment that has come from the United States relates to his communications with a source about a major public interest publication. This is about Chelsea Manning’s leak in 2010, this is about US spying on UN and other European politicians, this is about human rights abuse and corruption the world over, this is about evidence of US war crimes, killing journalists. These are the publications that he is now facing extradition and prosecution over.

SR: It also about rape allegations and women who feel they haven’t seen those allegations been brought to justice.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: An investigation in Sweden which he co-operated with while protecting himself from extradition to the United States. If that investigation is reopened, if there is an extradition request, we will deal with it.

SR: You would comply with an extradition request if it is made by Sweden?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: If Sweden makes an extradition request it will be a question for the Home Secretary about which case will take precedence and we will certainly be asking for the same assurances that we asked before which is that he wouldn’t be sent to the United States after dealing with it. That is the same assurance we were seeking in 2010 and the refusal to give that is why he sought asylum when he did.

SR: So otherwise he doesn’t want to comply with it unless there is that specific assurance?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: The concern is and has always been about protecting him from being sent to the United States.

SR: Okay, well let’s talk about the US extradition request. The argument seems to be that this was a journalist concerned with transparency, that it was a public interest defence but the US charge is quite specific isn’t it? It’s about hacking into a computer system.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: If anybody actually reads beyond the headline of the Department of Justice press release which is about hacking, if you look at the actual factual allegations, what it boils down to is an allegation that he was communicating with a source and encouraging a source to provide information and providing – allegedly providing information to assist the source to protect their identity. So Chelsea Manning, there is no suggestion that Julian Assange hacked US computers, there is no suggestion that he assisted Chelsea Manning to access material that Chelsea Manning didn’t already have access to. It is simply an allegation of an intention to assist a source to protect their identity whilst accessing that material. This is something that journalists do all the time. Now it remains to be seen whether those allegations can be proven but that’s why US free speech groups have been up in arms this week and are very concerned about the chilling impact it will have because it clearly, this indictment clearly engages news gathering activities and the kind of communications that journalists have with sources all the time.

SR: Other human rights groups though have been concerned about some of the actions WikiLeaks had taken with regard to that material, for example the fact that Amnesty International and Reporters Without Borders said that the Taliban could use some of the data that he made public in order to try and target Afghan civilians who worked for the coalition, effectively putting lives at risk. What is the journalistic justification for that?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: Well journalists publish information all the time which is alleged by government officials to potentially put at risk national security or put people at risk ….

SR: But they can take steps to ensure that civilians are protected as well.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: That’s true and WikiLeaks also had a redaction process in the early days when they were doing the publications with the Guardian and there were some issues around that but the fact is there are constant allegations that WikiLeaks has somehow caused damage to people, there is no evidence that anybody has been harmed and certainly not killed as a result of WikiLeaks publications, no evidence of that.

SR: I guess I am trying to get to a little bit as well with the first question about some people will think this is a man who sees himself as above the law. I can understand that you have question marks over the US justice system but Mr Assange also doesn’t want to face the Swedish courts, he can also appeal in the UK to the Supreme Court against extradition, he can also appeal to the European Court of Human Rights. So why don’t you trust any of these courts – the US, the European Court, the UK court, the Swedish court?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: The concern was not about facing Swedish justice and I’ll say it again, it was not about his concern about facing Swedish justice, it was about the risk of facing American injustice. Now this case was highly politicised, if we look back to 2010 which is what the indictment relates to, we had high profile US politicians calling for him to be killed by drone strike, we’ve seen just this week high profile senators saying he is now our property and we’ll do with him what we will. These are serious concerns and if we look at the way that…

SR: Do you think that the UK government is politicising it as well then?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: I think this case has been politicised. Now we will now fight this extradition request from the United States in the courts so it is a matter for the British courts now but in terms of the broader context, this is somebody who has published the largest amount of American classified information in history, he has embarrassed the US military industrial complexes, he has embarrassed the CIA. We have had the Director of the CIA call him a hostile non-state intelligence agency and that he ought to be prosecuted, we ought to take WikiLeaks down and he ought not to benefit from First Amendment protections. These are very serious allegations at the highest level of the US Administration and to think that this case is not politicised ignores the fact.

SR: He has had some political support from Jeremy Corbyn who tweeted to say that he doesn’t think he should be extradited to the US, was that welcome?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: Of course it’s welcome and I think that anyone who believes in public interest journalism and understands the public interest in the publications that WikiLeaks made – as I said, spying on UN leaders, spying on European politicians, spying on the French President – WikiLeaks publications included material that Amnesty International credited with the events in Tunisia which sparked the Arab Spring and democratic revolutions. It has changed the way we think about journalism and the right to know. Having someone extradited for any actions associated with those publications that have won journalism awards the world over ought to be a concern and it’s right and correct that Jeremy Corbyn said what he said.

SR: Just finally, this is a man who has spent seven years in a room at the Ecuadorian Embassy, I mean we have all seen the footage of him emerging from the Ecuadorian Embassy. There are a lot of allegations of where the relationship went down, including that he spread faeces on the walls, what has it been like for him living in there?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: I think the first thing to say is that Ecuador has been making some pretty outrageous allegations over the past few years to justify what was an unlawful and extraordinary act in allowing British police to come inside an Embassy.

SR: So it’s not true then?

JENNIFER ROBINSON: That’s not true. Look, it’s a difficult situation, I have been visiting him in the Embassy throughout the seven year period, he hasn’t had access to the outside, he has been inside a room effectively as you said for more than seven years. People have children who are six and seven years old, for your child’s entire life has been inside a room in quite difficult circumstances. Now the politics of the case with respect to Ecuador changed with a change of government, with Lenin Maduro coming to power, and ever since then inside the Embassy it has become more and more difficult to the point where even Human Rights Watch said it was akin to solitary confinement so he has had a very difficult time, it’s not been easy and to suggest that someone would choose to remain in there without legitimate concerns about US extradition, which is exactly what was proven this week, I think people can’t really understand what it would be like to live in a room like that for a very long time, it’s not been easy.

SR: Okay, thank you very much for being on the programme today.

JENNIFER ROBINSON: Thank you.