Greg Barns claims that the case should be stopped because it represents an unprecedented attempt by the US to prosecute an individual who is not one of its citizens, and who was not in the US when the WikiLeaks material was published. This is called extraterritorial reach and generally the law frowns on it.
“To reward the US in the Assange case is to say that any person, anywhere in the world, who publishes materials which the US government doesn’t want the world to know about could find themselves on the end of an extradition request from the Department of Justice,” Barns adds.
“Australia, along with the US and the UK, last year criticised China for the extraterritorial application of its Hong Kong security law. It is, according to a state department spokesperson ‘a dangerous precedent that threatens the human rights and fundamental freedoms of people all over the world’. Unless the US and Australia release Assange now they can’t claim any moral high ground on this issue.”
charonn0@startrek.website 7 months ago
The US and the UK have an extradition treaty that permits this. The UK can withdraw from the treaty, but unless they do this line of argument is willfully dishonest.
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Yep, the argument pretty much fails right out of the gate.