Connect with us

Politics

UN torture expert urges UK to halt Julian Assange’s US extradition over fears of torture, human rights abuses

Published

on

UN torture expert urges UK to halt Julian Assange’s US extradition over fears of torture, human rights abuses

A United Nations expert on torture is calling on the U.K. government to halt the possible extradition of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to the U.S., citing concerns that he would be at risk of treatment amounting to torture or other forms of ill-treatment or punishment.

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, Alice Jill Edwards, said in a press release that Assange “suffers from a long-standing and recurrent depressive disorder” and that he “is assessed as being at risk of committing suicide.”

The hearing for Assange’s possible final legal appeal challenging his extradition to the U.S. to face charges for publishing classified U.S. military documents will be held at the High Court in London on Feb. 20 and 21. If he is extradited to the U.S. after exhausting all his legal appeals, Assange would face trial in Alexandria, Virginia, and could be sentenced to up to 175 years in an American maximum-security prison.

“If extradited, he could be detained in prolonged isolation while awaiting trial, or as an inmate. If convicted, he could be sentenced to up to 175 years in prison,” Edwards said.

UK HIGH COURT SETS DATE FOR JULIAN ASSANGE’S FINAL APPEAL CHALLENGING US EXTRADITION

Advertisement

A United Nations expert on torture is calling on the U.K. government to halt the possible extradition of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to the U.S., citing concerns that he would be at risk of treatment amounting to torture. (AP)

Assange, 52, is facing 17 charges for allegedly receiving, possessing and communicating classified information to the public under the Espionage Act, and one charge alleging a conspiracy to commit computer intrusion.

The charges were brought by the Trump administration’s Justice Department over WikiLeaks’ 2010 publication of cables leaked by U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning detailing war crimes committed by the U.S. government in the Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, detention camp, Iraq and Afghanistan. The materials also exposed instances of the CIA engaging in torture and rendition.

WikiLeaks’ “Collateral Murder” video showing the U.S. military gunning down civilians in Iraq, including two Reuters journalists, was also published 14 years ago.

“The risk of being placed in prolonged solitary confinement, despite his precarious mental health status, and to receive a potentially disproportionate sentence raises questions as to whether Mr. Assange’s extradition to the United States would be compatible with the United Kingdom’s international human rights obligations, particularly under article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as respective articles 3 of the U.N. Convention against Torture and the European Convention on Human Rights,” Edwards said.

Advertisement

“Diplomatic assurances of humane treatment provided by the Government of the United States are not a sufficient guarantee to protect Mr. Assange against such risk,” Edwards said. “They are not legally binding, are limited in their scope, and the person the assurances aim to protect may have no recourse if they are violated.”

Assange, an Australian journalist and publisher, has been held at London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison since he was removed from the Ecuadorian Embassy on April 11, 2019, for breaching bail conditions. He had sought asylum at the embassy since 2012 to avoid being sent to Sweden over allegations he raped two women because Sweden would not provide assurances it would protect him from extradition to the U.S. The investigations into the sexual assault allegations were eventually dropped.

Last month, a group of Australian lawmakers wrote a letter to U.K. Home Secretary James Cleverly demanding Assange’s U.S. extradition be halted over concerns about his safety and well-being. The letter asked the U.K. government to make an independent assessment of Assange’s risk of persecution.

AUSTRALIAN MPS PEN LETTER URGING UK GOVERNMENT TO STOP JULIAN ASSANGE’S US EXTRADITION, CITING HEALTH CONCERNS

The U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, Alice Jill Edwards, said Assange “suffers from a long-standing and recurrent depressive disorder” and that he “is assessed as being at risk of committing suicide.” (Getty Images)

Advertisement

A cross-party delegation of Australian lawmakers also visited Washington, D.C., last year and met with U.S. officials, members of Congress and civil rights groups to demand the charges against Assange be dropped. Multiple bipartisan efforts were also made last year by U.S. lawmakers who demanded Assange’s release.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has also repeatedly called on the U.S. in the last year to end the prosecution of Assange.

No publisher had been charged under the Espionage Act until Assange, and many press freedom groups have said his prosecution sets a dangerous precedent intended to criminalize journalism. U.S. prosecutors and critics of Assange have argued WikiLeaks’ publication of classified material put the lives of U.S. allies at risk, but there is no evidence that anyone was put in danger as a result of the documents being published.

The editors and publishers of the U.S. and European outlets that worked with Assange on the publication of excerpts from more than 250,000 documents he obtained in the Cablegate leak — The Guardian, The New York Times, Le Monde, Der Spiegel and El País  — wrote an open letter in 2022 calling for the U.S. to drop the charges against Assange.

The Obama administration elected not to indict Assange in 2013 over WikiLeaks’ 2010 publication of the classified cables because it would have had to also indict journalists from major news outlets who published the same materials. Former President Obama also commuted Manning’s 35-year sentence for violations of the Espionage Act and other offenses to seven years in January 2017, and Manning, who had been imprisoned since 2010, was released later that year.

Advertisement

But the Justice Department under former President Trump later moved to indict Assange under the Espionage Act, and the Biden administration has continued to pursue his prosecution.

“I call on the Government of the United Kingdom to carefully review Mr. Assange’s extradition order with a view to ensuring full compliance with the absolute and non-derogable prohibition of refoulement to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and to take all the necessary measures to safeguard Mr. Assange’s physical and mental health,” Edwards said.

The hearing for Assange’s possible final legal appeal challenging his extradition to the U.S. will be held at the High Court in London on Feb. 20 and 21. (Fox News Digital/Landon Mion)

Assange’s lawyer in the U.K., Jennifer Robinson, has previously said she fears he “would not survive if extradited to the U.S.”

Advertisement

Under the Trump administration, the CIA allegedly had plans to kill Assange over the publication of sensitive agency hacking tools known as “Vault 7,” which were leaked to Wikileaks, Yahoo reported in 2021. The agency said the leak represented “the largest data loss in CIA history.”

The CIA was accused of having discussions “at the highest levels” of the administration about plans to assassinate Assange in London and allegedly followed orders from then-CIA director Mike Pompeo to draw up kill “sketches” and “options.” The agency also had advanced plans to kidnap and rendition Assange and had made a political decision to charge him, according to the Yahoo report.

WikiLeaks also published internal communications in 2016 between the Democratic National Committee and presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s campaign that revealed the DNC’s attempts to boost Clinton in that year’s Democratic primary.

Politics

Appeals court declares DC ban on certain gun magazines unconstitutional

Published

on

Appeals court declares DC ban on certain gun magazines unconstitutional

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

An appeals court struck down a local law in the District of Columbia that banned gun magazines containing more than 10 bullets, describing the measure as unconstitutional. 

The ruling Thursday from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals also reversed the conviction of Tyree Benson, who was taken into custody in 2022 for being in possession of a handgun with a magazine that could contain 30 bullets, according to The New York Times. 

“Magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition are ubiquitous in our country, numbering in the hundreds of millions, accounting for about half of the magazines in the hands of our citizenry, and they come standard with the most popular firearms sold in America today,” Judge Joshua Deahl wrote on behalf of the two-judge majority in the three-judge panel.   

“Because these magazines are arms in common and ubiquitous use by law-abiding citizens across this country, we agree with Benson and the United States that the District’s outright ban on them violates the Second Amendment,” he added.

Advertisement

A salesperson holds a high capacity magazine for an AR-15 rifle at a store in Orem, Utah, in March 2021.  (George Frey/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“This appeal presents a Second Amendment challenge to the District’s ban on firearm magazines capable of holding ‘more than 10 rounds of ammunition.’ Appellant Tyree Benson argues that ban contravenes the Second Amendment so that his conviction for violating it should be vacated,” Deahl also wrote. “The United States, which prosecuted Benson in the underlying case and defended the ban’s constitutionality in the initial round of appellate briefing, now concedes that this ban violates the Second Amendment. The District of Columbia, which is also a party to this appeal, continues to defend the constitutionality of its ban.” 

“We therefore reverse Benson’s conviction for violating the District’s magazine capacity ban. And because Benson could not have registered, procured a license to carry, or lawfully possessed ammunition for his firearm given that it was equipped with a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds, we likewise reverse his convictions for possession of an unregistered firearm, carrying a pistol without a license, and unlawful possession of ammunition,” Deahl said.

Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby, the judge who dissented, wrote that, “The majority bases its common usage analysis on ownership statistics that show only that magazines holding 11, 15, or 17 rounds of ammunition are in common use.” 

GUN RIGHTS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY DEBATED AT SUPREME COURT

Advertisement

Magazines at Norm’s Gun & Ammo shop in Biddeford, Maine, in April 2013. From left, the first two are high capacity magazines for handguns, an AK-47 magazine, an AR-15 magazine and an SKS magazine.   (Shawn Patrick Ouellette/Portland Press Herald via Getty Images)

“The majority, however, fails to contend with the reality that these statistics do not support the conclusion that the particularly lethal 30-round magazine, such as the one Mr. Benson possessed here, is in common use for self-defense. It simply is not,” she added.

The District of Columbia can now appeal the decision to the Supreme Court, or ask the local appeals court to take another look at the ruling with a larger panel of judges, according to the Times. 

High-capacity rifle magazines are removed from a display at Freddie Bear Sports in January 2023 in Tinley Park, Illinois. (Scott Olson/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

The newspaper also reported that in a previous case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld the constitutionality of the local law surrounding gun magazine sizes. It’s unclear how the two rulings will interact. 

Related Article

Mike Lee unveils national constitutional carry bill to override 'hostile' state gun laws
Continue Reading

Politics

Contributor: The stars align for Democrats in Texas. Trump is helping them

Published

on

Contributor: The stars align for Democrats in Texas. Trump is helping them

If Democrats expect to flip a U.S. Senate seat in Texas, they’ll need all the stars to align. This almost never happens, because politics has a way of scrambling the constellations. But on Tuesday, the first star blinked on.

I’m referring to state Rep. James Talarico’s victory over Rep. Jasmine Crockett in the Democratic primary. Most political prognosticators agree that Talarico, an eloquent young Democrat who speaks openly about his Christian faith, is their best hope in a red state that Donald Trump won by 14 points.

The second star was Crockett’s conciliatory concession — far from a foregone conclusion after a nasty primary — in which she pledged to “do my part,” adding that “Texas is primed to turn blue, and we must remain united because this is bigger than any one person.”

The third star — a vulnerable Republican opponent — has not yet appeared over the Texas sky, although forecasters say it might.

Most observers agree that scandal-plagued Atty. Gen. Ken Paxton would be beatable in the general election, while incumbent Sen. John Cornyn would present a much tougher challenge. Cornyn is the kind of steady, conventional politician who tends to win elections, and so, of course, modern voters are extremely suspicious of him.

Advertisement

In the GOP primary on Tuesday, Cornyn’s 42% share of the vote edged out Paxton by about a point. Unfortunately for Republicans, neither candidate garnered enough votes to avoid a May 26 runoff election.

Conventional wisdom suggests that when a majority of Republican voters choose someone other than the incumbent in the first round of voting, an even greater majority will inevitably break toward the challenger in the runoff. If that happens, Paxton would become the nominee, and Democrats would get their third star to align.

Even better for Democrats — a fourth star, so to speak — would be for this protracted runoff to become a “knife fight,” as one Texas Republican predicted, in which Paxton staggers out of the fight as the battered GOP nominee.

The only problem is that Republicans can see these stars aligning, too.

And while the Texas Senate seat matters a lot on its own, it matters even more in the context of nationwide midterm elections, in which a Texas win would help Democrats take back the Senate.

Advertisement

Enter the cavalry — or, more accurately, President Trump, who is now entering a second war in the span of a week, this one a civil war in the Lone Star State.

The day after the primary, Trump announced that he would be “making my Endorsement soon, and will be asking the candidate that I don’t Endorse to immediately DROP OUT OF THE RACE!”

Reports suggest Trump may endorse Cornyn in order to save the seat for Republicans. But who knows? Trump is famously unpredictable. And it’s likely he admires Paxton’s ability to survive scandals that would have caused most normal politicians to curl up in the fetal position. As they say, “game recognizes game.”

Whomever he backs, conventional wisdom also says Trump should make his endorsement “soon,” as he promised. That would save Republicans a lot of time and money. But Trump currently has enormous leverage. Right now, people are coming to him, pleading for his support.

Do you think he wants to resolve that situation quickly?

Advertisement

Me neither.

With Trump, you never know what you’re going to get. In 2021, he helped torpedo Republican Senate candidates David Perdue and Kelly Loeffler in Georgia, handing Democrats control of the Senate. The following year he backed football legend Herschel Walker in another Georgia Senate race, which did not exactly work out great. Democrat Raphael Warnock won and holds that seat, though Walker is now ambassador to the Bahamas so that’s something.

This is to say: Trump’s political assistance does not always assist.

It’s unclear whether Trump’s endorsement would be dispositive — and whether he could muscle the other Republican out of the primary race.

Paxton, for example, initially vowed to stay in the race, no matter what. (He later suggested he would “consider” dropping out if the Senate passes the SAVE America Act, a bill to require proof of citizenship to vote.)

Advertisement

There’s also this: Trump’s endorsements tend to either be made out of vengeance or to pad the totals of an already inevitable winner, so his track record is probably overrated.

Case in point: While most of his endorsed candidates won their Texas elections, his endorsed candidate for agriculture commissioner lost reelection. And according to the Texas Tribune, “at least three Trump-endorsed candidates for Congress were headed to runoffs, one of them in a distant second place.”

Another issue is that Cornyn needs more than a perfunctory endorsement: He needs a clear, full-throated endorsement.

In a 2022 Missouri Senate race, Trump endorsed “ERIC,” which was awkward because two candidates named Eric were running.

More recently, he endorsed two rival candidates in the same 2026 Arizona gubernatorial race — like betting on both teams in the Super Bowl.

Advertisement

This is all to say that the only thing standing between Texas Democrats and a rare celestial alignment may be the whims of the Republican Party’s one and only star.

Sure, establishment Republicans can beg Trump to quickly step in and settle the race, and maybe he will. But it’s entirely possible the president will find a way to blow up his party’s chances for holding the U.S. Senate — and there’s nothing they can do to stop him.

When you’re a star, they let you do it.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

Published

on

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

new video loaded: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

transcript

transcript

President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

“The fact that you can’t admit to a mistake which looks like under investigation is going to prove that Ms. Good and Mr. Pretti probably should not have been shot in the face and in the back. Law enforcement needs to learn from that. You don’t protect them by not looking after the facts.” “Our greatness calls people to us for a chance to prosper, to live how they choose, to become part of something special. Anyone who searches for freedom can always find a home here. But that freedom is a precious thing, and we defend it vigorously. You crossed the border illegally — we’ll find you. Break our laws — we’ll punish you.” “Did you bid out those service contracts?” “Yes they did. They went out to a competitive bid.” “I’m asking you — sorry to interrupt — but the president approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across the country in which you are featured prominently?” “Yes, sir. We went through the legal processes. Did it correctly —” Did the president know you were going to do this?” “Yes.” “I’m more excited about just ready to get started. There’s a lot of work we can do to get the Department of Homeland Security working for the American people.”

Advertisement
President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

By Jackeline Luna

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending