BANGKOK: A plane believed to be carrying Julian Assange landed Tuesday in Bangkok, as the WikiLeak founder was on his way to enter a plea deal with the US government that will free him and resolve the legal case that spanned years and continents over the publication of a trove of classified documents.
Chartered flight VJT199 landed after noon at Don Mueang International Airport, north of the Thai capital. It was unclear if the plane was only refueling or how Assange will continue traveling to Saipan, the capital of the Northern Mariana Islands, a US commonwealth in the Western Pacific, where he will appear in court Wednesday morning local time.
He’s expected to plead guilty to an Espionage Act charge of conspiring to unlawfully obtain and disseminate classified national defense information, according to the US Justice Department in a letter filed in court.
Assange is expected to return to his home country of Australia after his plea and sentencing. The hearing is taking place in Saipan because of Assange’s opposition to traveling to the continental US and the court’s proximity to Australia, prosecutors said.
The guilty plea, which must be approved by a judge, brings an abrupt conclusion to a criminal case of international intrigue and to the US government’s years-long pursuit of a publisher whose hugely popular secret-sharing website made him a cause célèbre among many press freedom advocates who said he acted as a journalist to expose US military wrongdoing. Investigators, by contrast, have repeatedly asserted that his actions broke laws meant to protect sensitive information and put the country’s national security at risk.
Attorneys for Assange haven’t responded to requests for comment.
In a statement posted on X, WikiLeaks said Assange boarded a plane and departed Monday after leaving the British prison where he has spent the last five years. WikiLeaks applauded the announcement of the deal, saying it was grateful for “all who stood by us, fought for us, and remained utterly committed in the fight for his freedom.”
“WikiLeaks published groundbreaking stories of government corruption and human rights abuses, holding the powerful accountable for their actions. As editor-in-chief, Julian paid severely for these principles, and for the people’s right to know,” WikiLeaks said.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who has been lobbying for the United States to end its prosecution of Assange, told Parliament that an Australian envoy had flown with Assange from London.
“Regardless of the views that people have about Mr. Assange’s activities, the case has dragged on for too long. There’s nothing to be gained by his continued incarceration and we want him brought home to Australia,” Albanese added.
The deal ensures Assange will admit guilt while also sparing him from additional prison time. He had spent years hiding in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London after Swedish authorities sought his arrest on rape allegations before being locked up in the United Kingdom.
Assange is expected to be sentenced to the five years he has already spent in the British prison while fighting extradition to the US to face charges, a process that has played out in a series of hearings in London. Last month, he won the right to appeal an extradition order after his lawyers argued that the US government provided “blatantly inadequate” assurances that he would have the same free speech protections as an American citizen if extradited from Britain.
Assange has been heralded by many around the world as a hero who brought to light military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. Among the files published by WikiLeaks was a video of a 2007 Apache helicopter attack by American forces in Baghdad that killed 11 people, including two Reuters journalists.
But his reputation was also tarnished by rape allegations, which he has denied.
The Justice Department’s indictment unsealed in 2019 accused Assange of encouraging and helping US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks published in 2010. Prosecutors had accused Assange of damaging national security by publishing documents that harmed the US and its allies and aided its adversaries.
Prosecutors said in a charging document filed in connection with the plea agreement that Assange conspired with Manning to receive and obtain documents, notes and other writings related to the national defense and to “willfully communicate” those records. The document takes care to note that Assange was “not a United States citizen, did not possess a US security clearance, and did not have authorization to possess, access, or control documents, writings, or notes relating to the national defense of the United States, including classified information.”
The case was lambasted by press advocates and Assange supporters. Federal prosecutors defended it as targeting conduct that went way beyond that of a journalist gathering information, amounting to an attempt to solicit, steal and indiscriminately publish classified government documents.
The plea agreement comes months after President Joe Biden said he was considering a request from Australia to drop the US push to prosecute Assange. The White House was not involved in the decision to resolve Assange’s case, according to a White House official who was not authorized to speak publicly about the case and spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.
Assange made headlines in 2016 after his website published Democratic emails that prosecutors say were stolen by Russian intelligence operatives. He was never charged in special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation, but the inquiry laid bare in stark detail the role that the hacking operation played in interfering in that year’s election on behalf of then-Republican candidate Donald Trump.
During the Obama administration, Justice Department officials mulled charges for Assange but were unsure a case would hold up in court and were concerned it could be hard to justify prosecuting him for acts similar to those of a conventional journalist.
The posture changed in the Trump administration, however, with former Attorney General Jeff Sessions in 2017 calling Assange’s arrest a priority.
Assange’s family and supporters have said his physical and mental health have suffered during more than a decade of legal battles.
Assange took refuge in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London in 2012 and was granted political asylum after courts in England ruled he should be extradited to Sweden as part of a rape investigation in the Scandinavian country. He was arrested by British police after Ecuador’s government withdrew his asylum status in 2019 and then jailed for skipping bail when he first took shelter inside the embassy.
Although Sweden eventually dropped its sex crimes investigation because so much time had elapsed, Assange had remained in London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison during the extradition battle with the US
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange stops in Bangkok on his way to a US court and later freedom
https://arab.news/jagdp
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange stops in Bangkok on his way to a US court and later freedom
Fact Focus: Trump wasn’t exonerated by the presidential immunity ruling, even though he says he was
- None of Trump’s pending cases have been dismissed as a result of the ruling
Former President Donald Trump on Tuesday misrepresented in a social media post what the US Supreme Court’s Monday ruling on presidential immunity means for his civil and criminal cases.
“TOTAL EXONERATION!” he wrote in the post on his Truth Social platform. “It is clear that the Supreme Court’s Brilliantly Written and Historic Decision ENDS all of Crooked Joe Biden’s Witch Hunts against me, including the WHITE HOUSE AND DOJ INSPIRED CIVIL HOAXES in New York.”
But none of Trump’s pending cases have been dismissed as a result of the ruling, nor have the verdicts already reached against him been overturned. The ruling does amount to a major victory for the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, whose legal strategy has focused on delaying court proceedings until after the 2024 election.
Here’s a closer look at the facts.
CLAIM: The Supreme Court’s ruling that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution means “total exoneration” for former President Donald Trump.
THE FACTS: Although the historic 6-3 ruling is a win for Trump, he has not been exonerated and his legal troubles are far from over. A delay of his Washington trial on charges of election interference has been indefinitely extended as a result. Also, he still faces charges in two other criminal cases, and the verdicts already reached against him in a criminal and a civil case have not been overturned.
Barbara McQuade, a law professor at the University of Michigan and former US attorney for the state’s Eastern District, told The Associated Press that Trump’s claim is “inaccurate for a number of reasons.”
“The court found immunity from prosecution, not exoneration,” she wrote in an email. “The court did not say that Trump’s conduct did not amount to criminal behavior. Just that prosecutors are not allowed to prosecute him for it because of the special role of a president and the need to permit him to make ‘bold’ and ‘fearless’ decisions without concern for criminal consequences.”
McQuade wrote that Trump’s case over classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate won’t be affected, as it arose from conduct committed after he left the White House. She added that any impact on his New York hush money trial “seems unlikely” since the crimes were committed in a personal capacity.
“In addition, the Court’s opinion is solely focused on immunity for criminal conduct,” McQuade continued, explaining that it will not protect him from civil liability in his cases regarding defamatory statements about advice columnist E. Jean Carroll or fraudulent business practices conducted at the Trump Organization.
Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority said former presidents have absolute immunity from prosecution for official acts that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority” and are presumptively entitled to immunity for all official acts. Unofficial, or private, actions are exempt from such immunity.
This means that special counsel Jack Smith cannot proceed with significant allegations in his indictment accusing Trump of plotting to overturn his 2020 presidential election loss, or he must at least defend their use in future proceedings before the trial judge.
The case has not been dismissed. It was instead sent back to US District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who must now “carefully analyze” whether other allegations involve official conduct for which the president would be immune from prosecution. The trial was supposed to have begun in March, but has been on hold since December to allow Trump to pursue his Supreme Court appeal.
However, the justices did knock out one aspect of the indictment, finding that Trump is “absolutely immune” from prosecution for alleged conduct involving discussions with the Justice Department.
The opinion also stated that Trump is “at least presumptively immune” from allegations that he tried to pressure Vice President Mike Pence on Jan. 6, 2021, to reject certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s electoral vote win. But prosecutors can try to make the case that Trump’s pressure on Pence can still be part of the case against him, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote.
It is all but certain that the ruling means Trump will not face trial in Washington ahead of the 2024 election, as the need for further analysis is expected to tie up the case for months with legal wrangling over whether actions in the indictment were official or unofficial, the AP has reported.
Trump is facing charges in two other criminal cases, one over his alleged interference in Georgia’s 2020 election and the other over classified documents found at his Mar-a-Lago estate after he left the White House. Trump’s lawyers have asserted presidential immunity in both cases, but a ruling on the matter has not been made in either.
The former president was convicted in May of 34 felony counts in his hush money trial in New York. After Monday’s ruling, the New York judge who presided over that trial postponed Trump’s sentencing until at least September and agreed to weigh the impact of the presidential immunity decision.
Trump was ordered in February to pay a $454 million penalty as part of a civil fraud lawsuit, for lying about his wealth for years as he built the real estate empire that vaulted him to stardom and the White House. It is still under appeal.
In May 2023, a jury found Trump liable for sexually abusing Carroll in 1996 and for defaming her over the allegations, awarding her $5 million. Carroll was awarded an additional $83.3 million in January by a separate jury for Trump’s continued social media attacks against her. An appeal of the former decision was rejected in April. The latter case is still being appealed.
French PM urges united front to stop far-right takeover
- France’s political future remains up in the air as the far-right National Rally (RN) party seeks to take control of government for the first time
ARIS: France’s prime minister on Wednesday urged voters to form a united front to block the far right in legislative elections, warning that the anti-immigration party of Marine Le Pen was within reach of winning an absolute majority.
With four days to go until the second round in the vote, France’s political future remains up in the air as the far-right National Rally (RN) party seeks to take control of government for the first time.
The RN dominated the first round of voting, presenting the party of Le Pen with the prospect of forming a government and her protege Jordan Bardella, 28, taking the post of premier in a tense “cohabitation” with centrist President Emmanuel Macron.
But a poll by Toluna Harris Interactive published Wednesday forecast the RN winning just 190 to 220 seats in the 577-seat parliament, far less than the 289 needed for the far right to have an absolute majority and form a government on its own.
A left-wing alliance called the New Popular Front looked set to win between 159 and 183 seats, and the centrist presidential camp 110 to 135, it predicted.
The new polling forecast comes after more than 200 candidates from the left and the center this week dropped out of three-way races in the second round of the contest, aiming to prevent the RN winning the seats.
While the formation of this so-called “Republican Front” seems to have generally been a success for the government, the key question now is whether voters will respond to the pleas to block the RN.
“There is one bloc that is able to have an absolute majority and it’s the extreme right,” Prime Minister Gabriel Attal told France Inter radio.
“On Sunday evening, what’s at stake in the second round is to do everything so that the extreme right does not have an absolute majority,” he said.
“It’s not nice for many French to have to block (the RN)... by casting a vote they did not want to,” he added, but “it’s our responsibility to do this.”
In one extreme example of how the united front works, in a constituency in northern France the hard-left candidate pulled out to leave a straight contest between the far right and the tough-talking Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin — long a hated figure for some on the left.
Former prime minister Edouard Philippe, still an influential voice in the pro-Macron camp, told TF1 television he would be voting for a Communist candidate to stop the far right in his constituency.
Le Pen has said the RN would try to form a government, if it gets more than 270 seats, by winning over other lawmakers.
London-based risk analysis firm Eurasia Group said the RN’s hopes of an absolute majority had been “blunted” by the front against the far right.
But it added: “Sunday is an almost completely new election, with dynamics of its own. The turnout will be crucial.”
Janine Mossuz-Lavau, emeritus research director at the Cevipof institute in Paris, said that voters would “do what they liked” irrespective of the calls from politicians, and that turnout risked being lower than the 66.7 percent of the first round.
“There are those who will say ‘I will not choose between cholera and plague and I won’t vote’,” she told AFP.
One option that is the subject of increasing media attention is the possibility that rather than a far-right government, France could be ruled by a broad coalition of pro-Macron centrists, the traditional right, Socialists and Greens.
Philippe said that after the election he would support a new parliamentary majority that could span “the conservative right to the social democrats” but not include the hard-left France Unbowed (LFI).
His comments were also echoed by Xavier Bertrand, a heavyweight right-winger who served as a minister under president Nicolas Sarkozy. He called for a “provisional government” focused on “rebuilding our country.”
Le Pen meanwhile denounced the tactical moves and talk of alliances.
“The political class is giving an increasingly grotesque image of itself,” she wrote on X.
After controversy over some of the RN’s candidates, including one who withdrew after a photo emerged of her wearing a Nazi Luftwaffe cap, Bardella acknowledged there could be some “black sheep” but insisted he was not worried.
Macron has kept his distance from the final phase of voting, which will reveal the outcome of his election gamble that baffled even close colleagues.
He has not spoken in public since an EU summit last Thursday.
During to a cabinet meeting, he said there was “no question” that a post-election coalition could include the LFI, a participant told AFP.
France expels Iranian suspected of influence peddling for Tehran
- Deportation of Bashir Biazar, reportedly a former senior figure in state television in Iran, frustrated Paris-based activists who last month filed a torture complaint against him
- Case has emerged at a time of heightened tensions between Paris and Tehran, with three French citizens — described by France as ‘state hostages’ — still imprisoned in Iran
PARIS: France on Wednesday expelled an Iranian suspected of influence peddling on behalf of the Islamic republic and having links to the Revolutionary Guards ideological army, his lawyer and Iranian officials said.
The deportation of Bashir Biazar, reportedly a former senior figure in state television in Iran, frustrated Paris-based activists who last month filed a torture complaint against him.
Biazar had been held in administrative detention since the start of June and was subject to a deportation order from the French interior ministry.
Mohammad Mahdi Rahimi, the head of public relations for the office of the Iranian president, wrote on X that Biazar “has been released and is on his way back to his homeland.”
He said Biazar had been “illegally arrested and imprisoned in France a few weeks ago.”
But a representative of the French interior ministry, speaking at a hearing earlier Wednesday, said Biazar was an “agent of influence, an agitator who promotes the views of the Islamic Republic of Iran and, more worryingly, harasses opponents of the regime.”
The representative accused Biazar of filming journalists from Iranian opposition media in September in front of the Iranian consulate in Paris after an arson attack on the building.
French authorities also accused him of posting messages on social networks in connection with the war between Israel and the Palestinian militant group Hamas in Gaza in which he denounced “Zionist dogs.”
During the hearing, his lawyer Rachid Lemoudaa said that the expulsion order was based on “assumptions” and that his client’s comments fell within the scope of “freedom of expression.”
“I have never been made aware of any threat whatsoever” posed by Biazar, he added.
Biazar has been described by the London-based Iran International television channel as a former official for Iranian state broadcaster IRIB.
Iranian state media have described him as a “cultural figure.”
The case has emerged at a time of heightened tensions between Paris and Tehran, with three French citizens — described by France as “state hostages” — still imprisoned in Iran.
A fourth French detainee, Louis Arnaud, held in Iran since September 2022, was suddenly released last month.
Activist group Iran Justice and victims of human rights violations filed the torture complaint against Biazar last month in Paris.
It accuses Biazar of complicity in torture due to his past work with IRIB, describing him as a former director of production there.
The complaint referred to the regular broadcasts by Iranian state television of statements by — and even interviews with — Iranian or foreign prisoners, which activists regard as forced confessions.
“It is incomprehensible... that no legal proceedings have been initiated” against Biazar, Chirinne Ardakani, the Paris-based lawyer behind the complaint, told AFP.
She said there were “serious indications” implicating Biazar “in the production, recording and broadcasting of forced confessions obtained clearly under torture.”
“Nothing is clear in this case,” she added.
The French citizens still held in Iran are Cecile Kohler, a teacher, and her partner Jacques Paris, detained since May 2022, and another man identified only as Olivier.
Kohler appeared on Iranian television in October 2022 giving comments activists said amounted to a forced confession.
Amnesty International describes Kohler as “arbitrarily detained... amidst mounting evidence Iran’s authorities are holding her hostage to compel specific action(s) by French authorities.”
Meanwhile, Sweden last month released Hamid Noury, a former Iranian official it had jailed over the 1988 mass executions of dissidents in Iran, in exchange for two Swedes jailed in the Islamic republic.
The exchange was bitterly criticized by campaigners who had fought for Noury to be bought to justice under the principle of universal jurisdiction, and by the family of Swedish citizen Ahmadreza Jalali, who faces the death penalty in Iran and was not included in the deal.
Election outcomes won’t change its Ukraine support, says the UN General Assembly’s president
- That stance “cannot change because this is a matter of law,” General Assembly President Dennis Francis told AP
- The UN’s main policy-making body has given broad support for efforts to uphold Ukraine’s sovereignty, Francis said
KYIV: The UN General Assembly will keep standing up for Ukraine’s territorial integrity and sovereignty whatever the outcome of national elections across the globe this year, the body’s president said Wednesday, adding that “no country has the right to invade another country.”
That stance “cannot change because this is a matter of law,” General Assembly President Dennis Francis told The Associated Press during his first visit to Ukraine as Kyiv’s forces battle Russia’s invasion for a third year.
The UN’s main policy-making body has given broad support for efforts to uphold Ukraine’s sovereignty, Francis said.
But elections this year in the US and in a handful of key European Union countries have raised concerns about a potential shift in policies among Western nations whose military and financial support has been crucial for Ukraine to thwart the Kremlin’s ambitions.
“It will be for us to witness over time what the implications of the results of those elections are for the entire international system and in particular for the state of Ukraine,” Francis said.
“I am convinced that the people of Ukraine will not give up,” he said, whatever the election outcomes. “They will not accept it and they will not allow foreign domination of their homeland.”
Speaking in Kyiv at the end of a two-day visit, Francis called on Russia “to withdraw immediately all its military forces from the territory of Ukraine” — a reference to a General Assembly resolution that was approved shortly after the outbreak of the war. More than two years later, Moscow’s army is slowly seizing new land in eastern Ukraine.
Francis met with Ukrainian officials, including President Volodymyr Zelensky, to discuss peace and international security. He pledged support for Zelensky’s peace plan, which was discussed at a recent international gathering in Switzerland attended by scores of countries and bodies, including the UN
“I think there are many important elements in (Zelensky’s plan) that can provide a foundation for dialog when that time is appropriate,” he said. “Let us see where it takes us.”
Italy appeals court upholds conviction of 2 Americans in death of policeman but reduces sentences
- The new verdict drew acceptance from the men’s families and disappointment from the officer’s widow
- Teenagers at the time of the slaying, the former schoolmates from the San Francisco Bay area had met up in Rome to spend a few days vacationing
ROME: An Italian appeals court on Wednesday upheld the convictions of two American men in the slaying of an Italian plainclothes police officer during a botched sting operation but significantly reduced their sentences.
The new verdict, ordered after Italy’s highest court threw out the original convictions, drew acceptance from the men’s families and disappointment from the officer’s widow.
Finnegan Lee Elder and Gabriel Natale-Hjorth had been found guilty in the July 2019 slaying of Carabinieri Vice Brig. Mario Cerciello Rega, and after the first trial, were both sentenced to life in prison, Italy’s harshest penalty.
Those sentences were reduced on appeal before Italy’s highest Cassation Court last year ordered a new trial altogether. On Wednesday, the appeals court convicted Finnegan and sentenced him to 15 years and 2 months in prison; it sentenced Natale-Hjorth to 11 years and four months, along with an 800 euro ($863) fine.
“I don’t think we could ask for a reasonable, better decision today,” said Ethan Elder, Finnegan Lee Elder’s father.
Teenagers at the time of the slaying, the former schoolmates from the San Francisco Bay area had met up in Rome to spend a few days vacationing. The fatal confrontation took place after they arranged to meet a small-time drug dealer, who turned out to have been a police informant, to recover money lost in a bad drug deal. Instead, they were confronted by two officers.
Cerciello Riga was stabbed 11 times with a knife brought from the hotel room.
In ordering the retrial, the Cassation Court said it hadn’t been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants, with limited Italian language skills, had understood that they were dealing with Italian police officers when they went to meet the alleged drug dealer.
The defense had argued that the defendants didn’t know they were facing law enforcement when the attack happened, an argument repeated during the new trial.
Prosecutor Bruno Giangiacomo said his office would wait to read the court’s written reasonings before deciding on a possible appeal to the Cassation. In Italy, both defendants and prosecutors can appeal at every level of judgment.
“Both aggravating factors that were increasing the penalty were excluded,” Giangiacomo said after the verdict. “This could be a delicate point where we can think about an appeal to the Cassation court.” Prosecutors had asked that Finnegan be sentenced to 23 years and nine months and Natale-Hjorth to 23 years.
Rosa Maria Esilio, the widow of Cerciello Rega, was “devastated” by the verdict, said her lawyer Massimo Ferrandino.
“For five years she has been carrying a huge pain. She was the one who closed the eyes of her husband in the morgue. You can imagine her pain today too,” he said.
The killing of the officer in the storied Carabinieri paramilitary police corps shocked Italy, and the 35-year-old Cerciello Rega was mourned as a national hero.
Prosecutors alleged Elder stabbed Cerciello Rega with a knife that he brought with him on his trip to Europe and that Natale-Hjorth helped him hide in their hotel room. Under Italian law, an accomplice in an alleged murder can also be charged with murder without carrying out the slaying.
But lawyer Francesco Petrelli, who represented Natale-Hjorth, said the appeals court clearly recognized that there was a different level of participation by his client.
“There was a reduction, mainly of the responsibility,” he said, adding that “there was a shift from intentional malice to negligence.”
Prosecutors contend that the young Americans concocted a plot involving a stolen bag and cellphone after their failed attempt to buy cocaine with 80 euros ($96) in Rome’s Trastevere nightlife district. Natale-Hjorth and Elder testified they had paid for the cocaine but didn’t receive it.
In a statement released by lawyers after the new verdicts, Leah Elder, Finnegan Elder’s mother, insisted that her son was prepared to take responsibility for his actions and move on.
“This trial is unfortunately connected to the tragedy of a person’s death, a grave fact that has marked and will forever mark the lives of all the families involved,” she said. “Bringing out the truth of the facts would help Finnegan take full responsibility for the pain he caused with his tragic reaction. I hope that, even as he pays for his mistake, he will also open up to hope for the future.”
