Thread by @MaryKostakidis

Extradition September hearing Day 7 (Day 9 incl 2 Covid days)

Waiting for the Host to connect me

We can see the courtroom but have no sound yet.

The first witness is NZ journo is Nick Hagar

Glimpse of JA

NH: I’m a user of the data. Book on NZ role in intel. Wants to read something from his statement. Lewis objects. Nick reads: reads about his personal motivations. Judge says little point because it is all before the court. He continues: we want to reveal the truth to save us from

The scourge of war, & JA similarly motivated.

We need classified info, essential for our role to inform the public. There is no realistic & effective alternative. Govts automatically say someone will be harmed, shown as wildly exaggerated. My books are used as training tools for intel recruits. In the W docs I read about

aspects of the war that gave me a good overall picture of the war - an outstanding example of info that serves the public interest.

I am experienced in evaluating classified material. (Nick is hilarious, he ignores the questions & the judges comments & says what he wants to say, can’t wait for the cross examination)

Nick: collateral Murder video effect was the equivalent of the death of George Floyd - I can’t breathe. It, the rules of engagement, war logs affected the guidelines/precautions in dealing with civilians.

In Nov 2010 I was part of Wikileaks rigorous program to vet the docs with experts all over the world. Plan was to do it in a slow, orderly, diligent process - they were very serious about what they were doing, focussed, responsible.

Nick: I’m tired of the news coverage on JA - the person I know is thoughtful, humorous, energetic, very principled & trying to make the world a better place, an inspired idea: in an era where secrecy was was increasing, the digital era could be harnessed for good.

Lewis: have you read the indictment? The Extradition request. Tell us what you understand the essence of the charge
Nick: it’s a mish mash.
Lewis: going thru the usual questions ie do you know he hasn’t been charged with publishing the Collateral Murder video.

Nick: yes. The reason I raised it is because the effect & significance of the releases affect the world as a whole.

ie the entire release, incl Coll M

Lewis: have you ever conspired to hack a password?
Nick: no, but What you’re asking shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what I do. Investig. Journos do not receive info “Passively”, we seek sources, we actually encourage them. We work with people who are breaking the law. We

Have pastoral responsibilities to.. Lewis interrupts.
Lewis: you have evidence in an Inquiry & didn’t reveal sources. Would you publish the name of your source?
Nick: of course not but .. Lewis interrupts
Lewis refers to an extract from the Guardian 2 Sept deploring W dump

Nick: my understanding is the information came out before it came out elsewhere. You know those facts are disputed so can’t comment sorry.
Lewis going to the bundle.. reads from Leigh & Harding’s book: “W intended to release the lot... including names of informants.. J not

Concerned.. saying they are informants, they deserve to be killed”. Do you agree with those sentiments.
Nick: there was bitter animosity & I don’t want to dignify hearsay.
Lewis: do you just want to help JA here?
Nick: I regard him an unreliable source
Lewis goes to the quote

from JA at the Frontline Club.. from Dwyer affidavit.. “regrettable .. we are not obligated to protect them except from unjust retribution but if they are.... then the public need to know about it” do you agree?
Nick: no
Lewis: Did you need the names of the informants to write

your book?
Nick: no (wants to add.. but Lewis cuts him off)
Lewis: you say the claims of harm are wildly exaggerated. Do you agree the lives of those sources are put at risk?
Nick: the comment was not about the W docs specifically but about my life’s work. When I wrote the book

JA was not charged under the Esp Act, this changes everything (sorry I missed the question)

Lewis asks him about a report that was issued as a result of your work Hit & Run, exonerated the police.
Nick: you quoted a minor footnote in the book. Most of the findings were confirmed.
Lewis reads more allegations about inaccuracies in his boo.
Nick: no that’s not correct

and goes thru a list of allegations that were confirmed saying we got most of it right.. what’s this got to do with it he asks ( his reputation/credibility)

Lewis: how many cables did you review?
Nick: a few hundred concerning NZ
Lewis : what criteria did you use to make redactions?
Nick: in the countries I was looking at there was no threa5 to the people, just embarrassment.

How long did you take?
Nick: a few weeks.
Lewis: Maurizi says it took 2 people 9 months to review Italy docs (opportunity for a joke about Italy not taken)

Nick: I was happy with the time I took

Fitzgerald: do you understand JA also being charged with “obtain & receive”
Nick: yes, thank you that was what I was trying to say earlier
Glimpse of JA, sitting upright & back in his seat. He is wearing a burgundy tie.
Fitzgerald

clarifies which source he should protect (your source rather than sources in docs).
Nick: I don’t believe that JA & his staff changed their view & approach to redactions after I left. The publication of the password which could not be retrieved once published is the cause of

names being published.
Fitzgerald asks about JA’s Frontline club & clarifies he does agree on protecting people from unjust retribution, but won’t commit to a position on other informants who may be sobbing people in dishonestly, saying these issues are at the cutting edge of

Journalistic ethics.
Relevance of Rules of Engagement: a yardstick to measure their behaviour but also to evaluate the rules - this was never discussed before in public. The basis of claiming this presented a dire risk to the troops is a misunderstanding - there is nothing to

Prevent them from acting in self defence.
Fitzgerald going to consult JA before winding up re examination of this witness (thankfully this pattern has developed .. otherwise JA has no way of pointing anything out to his team)

Short break before next witness, there will be an interpreter. Oooooo. It’s El-Masri!

There were drawn out negotiations about what parts of his statement the Prosecution was prepared to allow to be read in court. Perhaps they got around it by producing him.

General chatting going on.. Gareth, Jennifer with Fitzgerald. Earlier it looked like Kristinn also headed over with Fitzgerald to confer with JA.

Having someone who has been tortured by the CIA appear in person would seem an Own Goal for the Prosecution but you never know what will happen do you.

Still waiting for the interpreter but Defence will read a statement in the meantime.
Judge points out it should be a summary.

Summers says Ms Robinson is editing it. We can see Jen is on her laptop as is Kristinn

Jen is wearing a black suit & Stella is next to her in a white suit ( just so you can picture them)

Jennifer’s statement being read out: in 2017 I attended a meeting with JA & a US Congressman who attended with a Mr Johnson. They said they were acting on behalf of POTUS. They wanted to know source of the DNC leaks. Rohrbacher described a win win situation where JA would

Walk free. JA provided no information but they asked they convey to POTUS the first amendment issue & that Manning, the source, had been pardoned. (Much more articulate than I have summarised here).
The Prosecution said they have nothing to disagree with in the statement

Break, waiting for interpreter still.

Btw we got another glimpse of JA as he returned to his position after the last break. He was holding a red folder. It was a medium shot. I think asking to see him more often has made a difference.
(Oh, correction, just realised Stella is wearing black pants with a white jacket.)

I have just been disconnected

No, we have all been put on ice temporarily hope

We have picture now. Apparently they were doing a test with the next witness

Judge has left the room, still not ready

They are telling the judge he is dropping out

Summers: he is engaged in a good faith attempt to get connected. He isn’t a very technical gentleman. We have spoken to him today via Zoom. It’s a pity Madam the Court doesn’t use a more user friendly medium.
Judge asks if we can just have him on the telephone

Summers would like us to see him
Lewis concerned the judge doesn’t accept the veracity of El Masri’s allegations

Summers: defence are prepared the court not make a finding - not necessary for a finding on war crimes but the Strasberg Court has found the allegations are true. But Lewis’ concerns extend to disputing the whole of his evidence about what Wikileaks did ie reveal US attempts

to conceal it, so it was not possible to reach an agreement about what to leave out.
Lewis: we don’t accept the Us govt pressured the German govt.
Summers: that’s what the Wikileaks cables said.
Judge: I’m not prepared to make a minding
Summers: you don’t need to accept it

the Strasbourg court has made a finding.
Lewis: we won’t accept the Strasburg court finding
Can’t see why he should appear, at all.
Summers: the fact of the allegations are an important fact & the subject of the W disclosures is relevant.
Julian saying “I won’t accept that.”

Lewis: we have no instructions from the US re editing the statement, why doesn’t he just put the cables in.

Lewis: if we don’t object, you may make a finding about inadmissible evidence. As long as you don’t make any finding whatsoever Madam, we are happy.
Judge releases interpreter. El Masri WILL NOT TESTIFY Personally.

Summers summarises El Masri statement:
In 2003 on a tourist bus in Macedonia he was detained incommunicado by officials...

Madam I am instructed to stop, and take instructions.

Can you believe it? What a let down. No habeas corpus.

Fitzgerald still consulting JA, Kristinn pitching, judge back

Summers continues: I’ll treated for 24 days, handed over to a CIA rendition team, he was stripped, soddomised, beaten, hood over his head, flown to. Afghanistan, tortured for 5 months, incl by American prison director, the flown to Albania & dumped in the middle of nowhere

Encountered Albanian police, flew back to Germany, eventually began telling people about what happened ( his wife & children left the country thinking he had died). He was attacked, govts including his own tried to discredit him & silence him. He engaged a lawyer, & others also

Helped him, incl Goetz, who found the names of the CIA men involved, as a result the Munich prosecutor issued a warrant but it was not served, as we know from the Wikileaks docs, the US put pressure on Germany, as a result of the W cables el Masri says we now know why.

The revelations in the W cables were relied upon by the Strasburg court ( long look at JA for us).
El Masri filed a suit against the CIA agents in the Eastern Court of Virginia, which the prosecutor refused to pursue. The ICC have agreed to investigate & Pompeo has said extreme

measures would be taken against the officials of the court. He says without the cables, we would not have known.

Lunch break

Me: so to be clear, the judge has said she can accept that is what the cables say, but she does not have to accept, and won’t, that what they cables say is true.

It is on that basis that Summers was permitted to summarise El Masri’s statement