Assange: waiting online with other journalists for a ruling from District Judge Vanessa Baraitser. Although the hearing is taking place at the Old Bailey, this is a sitting of Westminster Magistrates’ Court. It is not a trial. The losing side may appeal against the DJ’s ruling.
Reporters covering the Assange hearing remotely can now see and hear the courtroom. Edward Fitzgerald QC is asking for a glass of water. The dock is currently empty.
Assange: court is waiting for him to be brought into the dock. Ed Fitzgerald QC, his counsel, is still desperate for a glass of water.
Assange enters the dock. He wears a suit and tie — and a facemask.
District judge enters court. Assange confirms his name and DOB.
DJ says she may cough but she is not contagious. Written judgment will be available when she has finished speaking. She will summarise this now but not read it out.
Assange judgment: he says this a political offence. DJ says current Extradition Act 2003 no longer treats this as a bar to extradition. Any breach of the treaty does not help Assange.
Assange judgment: password cracking of a DOD computer went beyond the activity of a journalist.
Assange judgment: Assange had been communicating with Manning through Jabber. He made a comment and she then uploaded more docs to a secure cloud directory. [More details of what they did]. This took him outside investigative journalism. Not protected by free speech (Shayler).
Assange judgment: DJ explains how Official Secrets Act works in UK. Defence claims he was protected as a journalist. But he disclosed names of informants. 100 at risk; 50 requested help. Others deterred from revealing abuses. Newspapers including @theguardian condemned decision.
@theguardian DJ on Assange: Official Secrets Act would not provide Assange with a defence if prosecuted in UK.
DJ: Assange charges not improper.
DJ on Assange: would it be unjust or oppressive to extradite him in view of the passage of time? He chose to enter the Ecuador embassy in 2012. He became a fugitive from the US in 2017. No evidence he was hampered by passage of time. Any unfair evidence could be excluded.
Assange: DJ turns to human rights convention. Rejects claim that jury would be partial. Plea-bargaining is a common feature of European justice systems. No improper motives for bringing charges. No evidence Manning was tortured. So no breach of article 6 ECHR.
Assange: DJ deals with art 7 ECHR. Notes 5th Amendment to US constitution: doctrine of vagueness and overbreadth in US law. DJ says Assange can bring these challenges in the US. Their courts well equipped to interpret their doctrines. That will ensure protection of art 7 rights.
DJ on Assange: was there breach of art 10 ECHR? He claims conduct was lawful. But he could have been prosecuted in the UK. So no breach art 10. US 1st Amendment protects freedom of speech, to foreign nationals as well as US citizens. This court trusts that a US court will comply.
DJ deals with Assange’s clinical depression, autism and Aspergers. He has told psychologist he had suicidal or self-harming thoughts and asked to speak to Samaritans. Half a razor blade found concealed in his cell. Monitored and prescribed antidepressants. He has prepared a will.
DJ on Assange: suicide in family. Real risk he’d be detained under special administrative measures in US. Viewed as threat to US national security. Real risk he’d be held at ADX Florence CO. Likely to damage his mental health. He has the intellect to avoid anti-suicide measures.
DJ: without protection at Belmarsh, he’s find a way to kill self. So I order his discharge.
Assange wins. US has 14 days to appeal.
US confirms it will appeal.
DJ asks Assange’s counsel about a bail application.
DJ says Assange will remain in custody for the time being.
Ed Fitzgerald QC for Assange confirms that he will be requesting bail.
DJ adjourns until 1145 while Fitzgerald takes instructions from Assange in the cells. He leaves court.
Para 346: For all of these reasons I find that Mr. Assange’s risk of committing suicide, if an extradition order were to be made, to be substantial.
More from the judgment:
355. I am satisfied that, if he is subjected to the extreme conditions of SAMs, Mr. Assange’s mental health will deteriorate to the point where he will commit suicide with the “single minded determination” described by Dr. Deeley.
358:
many of the protective factors currently in place at HMP Belmarsh would be removed… a SAMs regime would severely restrict his contact with all other human beings, including other prisoners, staff and his family.
Key paras on Assange judgment:
362. I accept that oppression as a bar to extradition requires a high threshold. I also accept that there is a strong public interest in giving effect to treaty obligations and that this is an important factor to have in mind…
However, I am satisfied that, in these harsh conditions, Mr. Assange’s mental health would deteriorate causing him to commit suicide with the “single minded determination” of his autism spectrum disorder….
363. I find that the mental condition of Mr. Assange is such that it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States of America.
Assange wins: For readers who don’t want to thread my tweets from this morning or wade through the 132-page ruling judiciary.uk/judgments/usa-… I have put together the key passages in this judgment here:
Assange: court will resume shortly to discuss the issue of bail pending appeal by US. I understand that a formal application for bail will be made later this week rather than today. If that’s correct, Assange will be returning to Belmarsh today.
Assange is in the dock but the resumed hearing has been delayed. No idea why.
Assange: court resumes. Ed Fitzgerald QC asks if he can make a bail application on Wednesday, having assembled further evidence. District judge agrees. Hearing will be at Westminster rather than Old Bailey.
Assange: Mark Summers QC makes an application for costs (remotely). This is granted.
Assange: US asks DJ to stay costs pending appeal. This issue is reserved until Wednesday. DJ withdraws costs order in the meantime. Hearing adjourned until 1000 on Wednesday at Westminster. Assange remains in custody. He talks to his lawyers before being taken back to the cells
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I hope to live-tweet some of the lockdown regulations challenge hearing that starts at 1030. Claimants include Simon Dolan, a businessman. Defendants include Matt Hancock, health secretary. Claimant’s counsel is Philip Havers QC. Defendant’s counsel is Sir James Eadie QC.
Claimants apply for permission to judicially review the lawfulness of the coronavirus regulations and guidance that have caused the closure of schools for the vast
majority of children in England and which continue to deprive the great majority of children of
an education.
Sir James Eadie QC for the health secretary will argue that permission should be refused.
I am hoping to live-tweet the procedural hearing today in Duchess of Sussex v Associated Newspapers. It’s not being streamed onto a public website but the High Court cause list indicates how people can access the remote hearing. I’m currently waiting to be let in.
It’s a privacy claim and is being heard in the Chancery Division Intellectual Property List by Mr Justice Warby. He is expected to reserve judgment until a later date. There are no witnesses at this stage.
The duchess complains about publication in the Mail on Sunday on 10 February 2019 of extracts from a letter she sent her father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018. She seeks damages for misuse of her private information, breach of her data protection rights and breach of copyright.
The Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales has told all judges that they will be using technology to conduct business which even a month ago would have been unthinkable. Final hearings and hearings with contested evidence very shortly will be conducted using technology (THREAD)
Otherwise, says Lord Burnett of Maldon, “there will be no hearings and access to justice will become a mirage. “Even now we have to be thinking about the inevitable backlogs and delays … that will build to an intolerable level if too much court business is simply adjourned.”
Lord Burnett urges all judges in England and Wales before agreeing to adjourn any hearing to use available time to explore with the parties the possibility for compromise.
Good morning from the @UKSupremeCourt. Lady Hale is expected to deliver a summary of the court’s judgment in the Miller/Cherry prorogation appeals at 1030. This will be live-streamed and televised. I’m in the court media room and plan to live-tweet (threaded) what’s said in court
The oral summary of the judgment normally lasts for only a few minutes. Written copies of the full judgment will then be posted online. There are no advance copies for the media (or, we are told, the parties) so the first anyone knows the result will be when Lady Hale gives it.
If the court is divided then a simple majority will decide the case. In that event, I would expect Lady Hale to tell us which of the judges are in the majority and which are in the minority. There can be no further appeal.
It will be interesting to see whether the justices ask Sir James Eadie QC the questions they put to Lord Keen QC yesterday about how the PM would respond to a declaration that his advice to HM was unlawful. Might he seek to recall parliament and prorogue once again?
It’s also worth remembering that Sir James Eadie’s arguments were successful at the High Court in London a couple of weeks ago. Three senior judges held that the claim brought by Lord Pannick QC on behalf of Gina Miller was ‘not justiciable in Her Majesty’s courts”.
Sir James Eadie QC has been First Treasury Counsel (“Treasury Devil”) for 10+ years. He’s an independent barrister in private practice (at @BlackstoneChbrs like Lord Pannick) but is briefed only by the government of the day and argues the most important cases on its behalf.
Pannick: what if another PM wanted to prorogue for six months or a year? Dicey, relied on by the PM, is not an answer. We only seek a declaration that the advice to HM was unlawful —because the PM has promised to comply with any declaration.
Pannick completes his submissions. If he can’t win this case, nobody can. But it’s very difficult to read the court, particularly at this early stage. We’ll hear the government this afternoon.
Lord Keen of Elie QC opens his appeal against the Court of Session ruling. He’s the Advocate General for Scotland, part of the UK government, and not to be confused with the Lord Advocate, He’s expected to deal mainly with the facts. Sir James Eadie QC will deal with law tomorrow