Julian Assange has all but lost his fight against extradition from Britain to America after the UK Supreme Court said his case “did not raise an arguable point of law.”
The former WikiLeaks chief’s future now rests in the tender hands of British Home Secretary Priti Patel, who must formally decide whether or not to extradite him for trial in the US.
American prosecutors want the Australian in court over a multitude of espionage charges, including one alleging that he commissioned the cracking of a password protecting US Department of Defence files from unauthorized access.
Assange’s fiancée Stella Moris described the Supreme Court rejection of her betrothed’s legal efforts as “corrupting,” saying: “Julian was just doing his job, which was to publish the truth about wrongdoing. His loyalty is the same as that which all journalists should have: to the public. Not to the spy agencies of a foreign power.”
WikiLeaks has been repeatedly accused of being a willing conduit for Russian intelligence agencies to steer and control political debate in the US. Although the site’s operators denied formal links, the US Democratic Party sued the Russian government in 2018 for hacking its servers. It alleged that WikiLeaks had been used to launder the stolen information into American political discourse, laying the grounds for Donald Trump to be elected US president in 2016. So the case goes, Trump was Russia’s preferred alternative to Democratic Party candidate Hillary Clinton.
Originally set up as a website for whistleblowers to leak