WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in final legal bid to avoid extradition to the US

In day two of Julian Assange’s last-ditch bid to evade extradition, US lawyers said the WikiLeaks founder had published “stolen” information that put peoples’ lives at risk.

US prosecutors urged England to extradite WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange saying he went “beyond ordinary journalism” by actively plotting to steal classified files and recruiting US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to hack government computers.

Clair Dobbin KC told the London High Court on Wednesday local time the Australian activist is not above the law and “damaged” US security and intelligence services and “created a grave and imminent risk” by publishing military documents.

“By encouraging Manning to hack into government computers and steal from them, the appellant was going a very considerable way beyond a journalist gathering information,” Ms Dobbin said.

Stella Assange, wife of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, arrives at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, England, for the second day hearing. Picture: Getty Images

“This was not a slip or an error, this was publication of vast material which the appellant encouraged Manning to obtain.

“The affidavit said the appellant knowingly published the material with names that were not redacted.

“People living under authoritarian regimes disappeared after the appellant stole vast amounts of classified documents and published them on his WikiLeaks website,” she said.

Assange was “not someone who has just set up an online box to which people can provide classified information,” she said.

“He sought to encourage theft and hacking that would benefit WikiLeaks.

“There is no immunity for journalists deciding to break the law,” she said.

Stella Assange flanked by WikiLeaks editor in chief Kristinn Hrafnsson, second left, takes part in a march from The Royal Courts of Justice, Britain's High Court, in central London. Picture: AFP

After the second day of Assange’s final bid to appeal extradition to the US on charges of espionage, his wife Stella led hundreds of protesters outside the court to march to Whitehall after judges reserved their decision to grant a new appeal until after March 4.

Rallying crowds outside the High Court on The Strand she accused the White House of “lying” about her husband to “criminalise’ journalism.”

“How pathetic the US case is they have to rely on lies and then the prosecutors say don’t question these lies because that would offend our ally,” she said.

“Fourteen years on, all they can do is repeat the lies from the very first Pentagon press conference talking point’s sheet.

“What they’re trying to argue is that state secrets trump revealing state crimes. This is the balance they’re trying to shift.

“They have to admit that what they’re doing is criminalising journalism – it’s criminalising the truth.

“They’re liars, they’re criminals and they’re persecuting the journalist who exposed them,” she added.

The court heard earlier that Washington – which labels the case “one of the largest compromises of classified information in US history”– is pushing to put on trial the Australian activist for publishing sources’ names and not for his political opinions.

“These were documents that disclosed to the world the unredacted names of individuals … of many of who lived in war zones and in oppressive regimes who were helping the US,” ms Dobbin said.

“He posed a grave and imminent risk and damaged the works and capability of the United State forces.”

“It is these core facts which form basis of this prosecution – not whether it is political.

“The district judge rejected outright he was not to be treated as a journalist or that he was doing journalism,” she said

“He cannot be treated as akin to an ordinary journalist or WikiLeaks akin to an ordinary publisher.”

The crowd of supporters surrounded Stella Assange as she left The Royal Courts of Justice, Britain's High Court, in central London. Picture: AFP

Assange’s legal team argued on Tuesday that the case was politically motivated.

Barrister Edward Fitzgerald said Assange, 52, was targeted for his exposure of “state-level crimes” and that Donald Trump had requested “detailed options” on how to kill him in a revenge attack.

US prosecutor Clair Dobbin insisted Assange’s prosecution was “based on the rule of law and evidence”.

“The appellant indiscriminately and knowingly published to the world the names of individuals who acted as sources of information to the US,” she said.

“The appellant and others at WikiLeaks recruited and agreed with hackers to steal classified information.

John Shipton, father of Julian Assange speaks outside the High Court. Picture: Getty Images

“It is these core facts which distinguish the position of the appellant from the New York Times and other media outlets – not his political opinions.”

In written submissions, the US legal team argued that the UK courts had already made “an emphatic rejection of the … attempts to characterise the allegations he faces as routine journalism or merely assisting a whistle blower”.

She rejected claims in a Yahoo article published in 2021 which reported the CIA and Trump administration had hatched a plot to kidnap or assassinate Assange while he was holed up at the Ecuadorean Embassy in London where he had sought asylum.

“In regards to the Yahoo article … there is no evidence in that respect,” Ms Dobbin said.

“Any attempt to remove the appellant would undermine the prosecution in the US, so it’s the other way round,” she said.

Supporters chant and hold letters spelling Assange’s name outside the High Court ahead of the second day of his US extradition case. Picture: Getty Images

On Monday lawyers for Assange argued he could face a “grossly disproportionate” 175-year jail sentence if convicted and could even face the death penalty if further charges were brought.

Ms Dobbin urged the judges to consider the “fundamental assumption of good faith” on the part of states with which the UK has “long established extradition relations”.

“The US is one of the most long-standing partners of the UK,” she told the court.

The Australian-born activist has been indicted on 17 charges of espionage and one charge of computer misuse over his website’s publication of classified US documents almost 15 years ago.

Outside the High Court independent MP Andrew Wilkie voiced his support for Assange after sitting through the hearing, saying: “It’s very important that an Australian parliamentarian come to London, at least for today to be a witness of what’s going on, given the events of just last week, when a thumping majority of the House of Representatives voted in favour of the motion, that this matter must be brought to an end.”

He added: “Sadly, though, when I’m in the courtroom this morning, the one man that I wanted to see that I didn’t see was Julian Assange himself. He is too unwell to attend the court.

“That is significant because if he is extradited to the United States and tried under the US Espionage Act, he’s facing the very real risk of 175 years in prison. In other words, it will be a death sentence since he’s not well enough to be in prison.”

He said he was not concerned about claims Assange had put lives at risk.

“Both the US government and the Australian Government inquiries into the potential risks to personnel from the release of information found that no one was killed, no one was put a serious risk,” he said.