The two legal battles for Julian Assange

The increasingly familiar founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange now finds himself confronting two separate potential legal battles. The first is whether he or his website can be held criminally liable for publishing thousands of documents stolen from the US Defence Department’s classified database. The second is whether he is guilty of sexual abuse towards two women following alleged incidents in Sweden in August this year.

The US embassy cables leaks

The US government has said it is pursuing a “very serious criminal investigation” into the leaks, which includes potentially pressing charges against Julian Assange as director of Wikileaks. However, their case against Assange is not strong. The most appropriate law America has is the Espionage Act of 1917. But its purpose is to prosecute US officials for stealing government secrets and handing them to foreign governments and spies.

The person has to be in a position of trust (i.e. an employee of the Defence Department) or an agent of a foreign power. Assange didn’t work for the US government, is a self-proclaimed journalist and no evidence has been revealed thus far to suggest he had any role in the stealing of the documents. The man suspected of stealing them is 23-year old Bradley Manning, a former US intelligence analyst who is now in US custody awaiting trial for allegedly leaking the Afghan War Diary documents and others published on Wikileaks this year.

The Espionage Act is effectively limited to targeting people like Manning. US courts have previously decided that receivers and publishers of stolen documents cannot be prosecuted because America’s mighty First Amendment protecting free speech takes priority. Wikileaks could potentially be prosecuted if they knew the publication would cause harm. But little actual harm has come from the cable leaks (as acknowledged by some US officials). And just to be sure, Assange sent the documents to the US Ambassador in London for prior checking but he chose not to respond.

Adding to the difficulty for the Americans is the fact that Wikileaks’ operates outside the US and the Espionage Act doesn’t apply to foreigners acting outside US territory. Even getting Julian Assange to the US for trial would be hard (assuming he doesn’t go there voluntarily). Espionage is seen as a political crime and political offences are not subject to extradition (taking a prisoner from one country to another) under the US-UK, US-Sweden or UK-Sweden extradition treaties. The US Attorney General said that he will look at “other tools at our disposal” (meaning other laws apart from the Espionage Act). But all require the person to have actually stolen the material.

The Swedish sex abuse claims

On the surface at least, the sexual abuse claims in Sweden don’t appear very strong. One woman claims ‘unlawful coercion’ (a category of rape) and sexual molestation because the consensual condom she and Assange were using broke, allegedly deliberately by Assange (yet she was “thrilled” to be hosting him for a party the next day).

The other woman claims she and Assange had consensual sex at night, but non-consensual sex (rape), and without a condom, in the morning before she woke up. The two women only laid their complaints after they had met and compared notes. And other vague aspects to the allegations include fears of a sexually transmitted disease, unreturned phone calls and hurt feelings.

Sweden has some of the toughest laws on sexual crime in the world. Rape, or ‘unlawful coercion’, can be caused by putting someone under emotional pressure for example. However, although they have the highest rate of reported rapes in Europe, they have among the least convictions. Swedish prosecutors initially dismissed the allegations, but then reopened them after a prominent lawyer and former politician elected to defend the women.

Assange is now on bail in Britain and fighting his extradition back to Sweden for questioning. His argument is that he is being persecuted on account of his political opinions and that the case was originally rejected and then reopened. A hearing is due on December 14 but the full extradition hearing could be up to three or four months away. Assange can choose to drag the extradition’s appeals process out for up to a year. But it’s unlikely that he will win, and he is probably better off just going to Sweden to answer the questions (given he claims he is innocent). Swedish prosecutors deny their case has anything to do with the Wikileaks revelations and say they haven’t come under any outside pressure to act.

But many people suspect American influence given the timing and details surrounding the allegations. Julian Assange used to fly under the radar but has been thrust into the limelight thanks to the power of Wikileaks. Unfortunately for him, the price of such fame can often be undesirable battles with the law. But in this case, they are battles he will probably win.

By The Casual Truth – www.thecasualtruth.com