US prosecutors reveal evidence against Julian Assange in extradition trial

Extradition trial hears the material US prosecutors have on WikiLeaks founder, but the fruits of an embassy spying operation won’t be used against him.

Julian Assange, riding a skateboard inside the Ecuadorean Embassy, was being spied on during his stay. Picture: El Pais

United States prosecutors have testified that any evidence gathered against Julian Assange from his time in the Ecuador embassy in London — where he was subjected to a spying operation — will not be used against him.

In closing submissions in Assange’s extradition trial presented to Westminster Court late Friday, the US prosecutors say there is no evidence the spying operation was connected to the extradition proceedings, which relate to events in 2010 and 2011, five years before any surveillance is alleged to have occurred.

During the main body of the extradition trial hearing in September, explosive evidence was tendered that Assange was subject to secret surveillance by a Spanish company, UC Global, employed by the embassy to conduct security, with claims the secret footage and tapes were then passed onto the CIA.

But US prosecutors said in their 151-page written closing argument that Assange’s granting of asylum in the embassy was “not an immunity’’ and there is no evidence international legal norms were violated.

The US lawyers said the evidence does not substantiate this allegation but even if the claims were true, pointed out that Assange was a fugitive from justice, as regards the United Kingdom authorities, and a suspect in the United States during his time in the embassy.

They said Assange has not shown any nexus between the alleged surveillance and the extradition proceedings and that it was not up to the court to police the surveillance activities of another state.

John Shipton, Assange’s father, arrives at the Old Bailey court in central London for Assange's extradition hearing.

In the closing submissions the US prosecutors revealed some of the evidence they have against Assange in relation to the 18-count indictment including material gathered from the military analyst Chelsea Manning’s personal and government computers, classified information that Manning searched for and downloaded from US Government computers; electronic messages Manning sent to and received from Assange; statements by Manning and statements made by Manning to others in furtherance of and in scope of the conspiracy; testimony of former members and affiliates of Wikileaks; documents and materials gathered from the Wikileaks website and evidence from the Wayback Machine; Assange’s public statements and tweets and testimony from those with expertise in US military, intelligence and diplomatic fields.

Assistant United States Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, Gordon Kromberg, testified that no privileged communications will be used against Assange in criminal proceedings. He said if the fruits of any surveillance in the Embassy exist, the prosecutors will not review or use any privileged communications and the use of privileged material against Assange would be barred by American law.

He also said that allegations in the indictment contained no legally privileged material and weren’t derived from legally privileged knowledge.

Meanwhile prosecutors claimed Assange’s entire defence against his extradition had mischaracterised the charges he faces.

The US prosecutors told the court that Assange’s argument that he shouldn’t be extradited because it was political is “absurd’’.

A van believed to be carrying Assange leaves the Old Bailey.

The US prosecutors, led by James Lewis QC, said: “It is clear in the instant case that Assange is not being prosecuted because of his political opinions, he is being prosecuted because he has committed serious criminal offences.’’

The Americans say Assange is implicated in other criminal activity than mere publishing: aiding and abetting and conspiring with Manning to breach the Espionage Act.

“The most important factor here is that there is clear evidence of criminality,’’they said. “It is not disputed Assange published classified information or that he obtained it from Manning. It is not disputed that names of individuals were published without redaction. There is compelling evidence Assange sought to assist Manning to crack the password hash. There is accomplice evidence that he incited and assisted them in computer hacking.’’

Assange gestures from the window of a prison van as he arrives at Southwark Crown Court in London in May, 2019.

The US prosecutors say that this extradition hearing is not a trial, yet have claimed despite this, Assange’s team have asked the court to decide on trial issues which are not relevant or admissible in an extradition hearing.

They said: “Consistently, the defence asks this court to make findings, or act upon the submission, that the United States of America is guilty of torture, war crimes, murder, breaches of diplomatic and international law and that the United States of America is a lawless state. These submissions are not only non-justiciable in these proceedings but should never have been made.’’

Judge Vanessa Baraitser said she will hand down her judgement on January 4, 2021.