By Eric London, wsws.org
John Pilger has been one of Assange's most prominent defenders. Here he leads an information meeting on his current condition.
On Monday, the Spanish newspaper El Diario exposed previously unknown facts about the Ecuadoran government’s illegal surveillance of WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange. For the last year of his stay in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, the government of both current president Lenín Moreno and predecessor Rafael Correa “spied on every movement of Julian Assange in its embassy in London,” El Diario reports.
The El Diario report is based on new documents obtained from UC Global Security Consulting, the firm contracted by the Ecuadoran government to spy on Assange under the guise of “protecting” him.
The report reveals that Ecuador substantially heightened its efforts to spy on Assange, subjecting him to 24/7 surveillance “between April 2017 and the end of February 2018 in his London refuge, according to unsigned intelligence reports of the Ecuadoran government labeled ‘confidential.’” In March, Ecuador cut Assange’s access to the Internet and telephone, effectively blocking him from communicating with the outside world.
El Diario reports: “The acts of the security company were not limited to detailing incidents that were registered during these dates [between April 2017 and February 2018] on the outside of the embassy, where there were gatherings and a small demonstration, but also detailed and photographed what occurred inside the government building, where a network of security cameras registered all of Assange’s activity. These images were sent to screens located in an apartment located 100 meters from the embassy in one of the most expensive neighborhoods in London.”
The report indicates that Assange was monitored as he moved from room to room and that security contractors watched him on a “live” feed. Reports from UC Global Security Consulting warned the Ecuadoran government that Assange was meeting with supporters of the Catalan independence movement and that such meetings could damage relations between Ecuador and Spain.
El Diario also noted that the intelligence reports compiled about Assange were rife with false information about Assange and the people with whom he met:
“The intelligence reports to which eldiario.es has had access are filled with errors and incorrect statements. Some names of visitors Assange received are not correct, there are misspellings and on some documents, and the Ecuadoran embassy is referred to as the Colombian Embassy. There are also mistakes in identifying the people with whom the WikiLeaks founder has access, like when the report speaks of Renata Avila, who it refers to as one of his Spanish lawyers from the office of Baltasar Garzon. Avila is not Spanish and she is not a lawyer in Garzon’s office.”
The revelation that intelligence reports included false information about Assange and his connections is a major blow to efforts to portray Assange as a shadowy manipulator. The international pressure campaign against Assange, led by the US government with support from its British allies, has focused on Assange’s alleged connections to various Russians and Trump representatives. The Democratic Party is currently suing Assange and WikiLeaks, claiming he illegally manipulated the outcome of the 2016 election.
The Ecuadoran government has likewise justified its decision to cut off Assange’s right to communicate with the outside world by fraudulently claiming he was both attempting to “hack” the Ecuadoran embassy as well as to sabotage Ecuadoran foreign relations. But the El Diario report shows the intelligence reports compiled on Assange are based on lies and falsehoods.
The El Diario report underscores the urgent danger Assange faces at the hands of the Ecuadorian government that has violated his rights both as an Ecuadoran citizen and as a refugee under international asylum law.
The fact that it was the government of Rafael Correa that initially ordered closer surveillance of Assange in 2017 also shows Assange has little reason to count on support from the Correa faction of the ruling Alianza PAIS party.
The bourgeois press in Ecuador is demanding that incoming Foreign Minister Jose Valencia, who replaced outgoing minister Maria Fernanda Espinosa on June 11, take measures to handle “the Assange case.” The right-wing El Comercio praised Valencia’s appointment as a sign that the Ecuadoran government is returning control over foreign affairs to career diplomats rather than Alianza PAIS loyalists.
El Comercio reported on June 8 that one of Valencia’s top priorities must include solving the Assange “problem,” which is “generating political and economic obstacles” and must be dealt with “quickly.” Valencia most recently served as Ecuador’s representative to the US-dominated Organization of American States (OAS). He was educated in the United States and received a master’s degree from Harvard Kennedy School of Government. [The clear mark of an "americanised" foreign politician.—Ed]
The round-the-clock surveillance of Assange is in clear violation of international law, specifically the right to asylum. The 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention bars vindictive restrictions on fundamental rights like those being carried out by Ecuador against Assange.
Article 26 of the convention bars host countries from blocking “free movement” of asylees, Article 15 guarantees the right to association and Article 16 guarantees access to the courts. The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, a body to which Ecuador is subject, has established that “the right of due process of law is a right that must be ensured to everyone, irrespective of his migratory status.”
These violations of international law further underscore the obligation of the Australian government to intervene on Assange’s behalf. Under the legal principle of diplomatic protection, Australia must protect the rights of its own citizens abroad. As the WSWS wrote on June 11, “The issue at stake for the Australian government is its commitment to the protection of the human rights of its citizens, including internationally recognized legal and democratic norms such as free speech, the right of due process, freedom from cruel and degrading treatment, and the right not to be punished in the absence of a criminal act.” To this must be added his right to asylum free of illegal retribution by his host country.
On Sunday, June 17, the Socialist Equality Party (Australia) is hosting a demonstration at 1:00 p.m. at Sydney Town Hall to demand the Turnbull government honor its obligations under international law by intervening to secure Assange’s right to return to Australia unmolested. We encourage all readers to join the demonstration and similar vigils and protests being held internationally in defense of Assange.
See below. Click orange button.
[bg_collapse view=”button-orange” color=”#4a4949″ expand_text=”Spanish El Diario sides with Assange” collapse_text=”Show Less” ]
Todos los medios tienen la obligación moral de proteger a Julian Assange
Si Assange ha cometido un crimen en EEUU, también lo han hecho el NYTimes, el Guardian, Der Spiegel, Le Monde y El País
La Fiscalía cierra el caso Assange por la imposibilidad de hacer avanzar la investigación EFE
La fiscalía sueca ha archivado la causa contra Julian Assange. No porque le considere inocente del caso del que se le acusa, que es de violación en grado menor, sino por un tecnicismo. “En el momento en el que un fiscal agota las posibilidades de continuar la investigación, está obligado a interrumpirla”. Es lo que ha dicho en la rueda de prensa la jefa de la fiscalía sueca, Marianne Ny.
Considera la fiscalía que “ya no es proporcionado mantener el arresto de Julian Assange en su ausencia a través de una orden de arresto europea”. Inglaterra, sin embargo, considera proporcionado mantener la orden de búsqueda y captura, por otro tecnicismo: “El juzgado emitió una orden para el arresto de Julian Assange por no entregarse al tribunal el 29 de junio de 2012. El cuerpo de policía metropolitanto está obligado a ejecutar esa orden en el momento en el que abandone la embajada”.
“Ahora que la situación ha cambiado y que las autoridades han interrumpido su investigación, Assange continúa buscado por una ofensa mucho más leve”, explica el comunicado. Siguiendo con esa lógica extraordinaria, si Assange hubiera sido declarado inocente de todos los cargos, aún tendrían que arrestarlo por evitar una detención que el mismo tribunal de las Naciones Unidas declaró “arbitraria y desproporcionada”. Y no por un tecnicismo sino por su contexto que, en este caso, es fundamental.
De hecho, Julian Assange se entregó a la justicia en la mañana del 7 de diciembre de 2010, en cuanto tuvo conocimiento de los presuntos delitos de los que había sido acusado en Suecia. Siguiendo el protocolo correspondiente, pagó una fianza de 200.000 libras (recaudada con donaciones) y entregó voluntariamente su pasaporte, confiando en una resolución. Aquel junio de 2012 al que se refiere la policía, el Tribunal Supremo de Reino Unido dió luz verde a su extradición por un delito de violación. Entre una fecha y la otra pasaron dos años, en los que Wikileaks publicó 391.000 archivos sobre la guerra de Irak que documentaban torturas, asesinatos y la muerte de miles de civiles en “incidentes desconocidos”; los primeros cables del Pentágono sobre Guantánamo y 251.287 informes del espionaje estadounidense a políticos extranjeros y altos funcionarios de Naciones Unidas. Las autoridades británicas se negaron a garantizar que Assange no sería deportado a los EEUU, en lugar de a Suecia. Y Assange se refugió en la embajada ecuatoriana, esa “ofensa más leve” por la que hoy le quieren arrestar.
De hecho, todavía se niegan. Un mes después de que Jeff Sessions, fiscal general del gobierno estadounidense, declare en rueda de prensa que detener a Assange es una prioridad. “Vamos a incrementar y estamos incrementando nuestros esfuerzos contra las filtraciones”. “Intentaremos poner a las personas en la cárcel allí donde sea posible”. Tanto el gobierno de Obama como el de Trump han tratado de encarcelar a Julian Assange por revelar información clasificada, por eso Assange insiste tanto en que su plataforma es un medio de comunicación. La Constitución estadounidense reconoce el derecho de los medios a publicar información clasificada. Si Wikileaks ha cometido un crimen, también lo han cometido el Guardian, New York Times, Der Spiegel, Le Monde y El País.
No sería la primera vez que el Gobierno de los EEUU intenta impedir que los medios publiquen sus trapos sucios. Nixon trató de impedir que el New York Times y el Washington Post publicaran los papeles del Pentágono, donde se demostraba que sus mentiras habían costado miles de vidas en Vietnam. Consecuentemente, en abril de 1971, la corte suprema le dijo que no. La nueva estrategia del Departamento de justicia de Trump es demostrar que Assange convenció a Chelsea Manning para que robara documentos clasificados, convirtiéndose en cómplice de varios delitos, incluyendo la traición. Cómo puede Assange haber cometido delitos de traición en EEUU sin ser ciudadano estadounidense ni operar en suelo estadounidense es otro tecnicismo que tienen por resolver. Sería proporcionado que hoy la ley ofreciera la misma resistencia que hace 46 años.
Hoy hay un país aparentemente democrático en la Unión Europea que está dispuesto a retorcer su propia legislación para mandar a un activista a un lugar donde no saben que no le espera el beneficio de un juicio justo. Si lo consigue, la víctima no serán solo Julian Assange y Wikileaks sino todos los que dependemos de la libertad de prensa para seguir viviendo en democracia.
Lo justo y proporcionado sería que el mismo consorcio de medios que se benefició de sus filtraciones hiciera un nuevo consorcio para garantizar que no es encarcelado por hacerlo. Pero será necesario que todos los medios trabajen para proteger el trabajo de Wikileaks, independientemente de la opinión que tengan sobre su fundador. Hay demasiado en juego.
“Cuanto más secreta o injusta es una organización, más miedo y paranoia inducen las filtraciones en su liderazgo”, decía un joven Assange en 2006, cuando Wikileaks empezaba una andadura que cambiaría para siempre el periodismo, para mejor. Su imagen se ha degradado mucho, pero lo que representa es más importante que nunca.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]
Things to ponder
While our media prostitutes, many Hollywood celebs, and politicians and opinion shapers make so much noise about the still to be demonstrated damage done by the Russkies to our nonexistent democracy, this is what the sanctimonious US government has done overseas just since the close of World War 2. And this is what we know about. Many other misdeeds are yet to be revealed or documented.
Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found
In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” — acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump — a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all.— Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report
