Retrieving the law for Assange

THE EDITOR: The extradition process against Julian Assange presently underway could fail on one or a number of grounds.

This can be addressed via immediate appeal to the High Court to stay the proceedings. The High Court has inherent jurisdiction to review prejudicial actions and in this situation there are a number of points needing early attention.

Assange may not get a fair trial in the US because in fact the leaks that are the subject of the dispute were welcomed by some Americans and as well served objective causes of justice in the US. Moreover, the extradition counts likely are not narrated in such a way that they could be severable for these purposes.

In the divisional court the prosecutor must prove each count individually and any one failing has the potential to undercut extradition; so that the High Court has to see to it that these principles are upheld.

As a matter of common law the jurisdiction of the High Court for this is inherent; and further, the court has an interest in maintaining its own procedure.

In addition to the question of fair trial is the issue of public policy, because even though Assange's actions may not be prosecutable in the UK, they nevertheless conferred advantages to the UK likewise. Jurisdiction is always founded both on the letter and on the spirit of the law.

Making charges against Assange stick that have yet to be brought could import what is repellant to English law, impossible for the defendant to engage in the extradition because of the absence of deponents, the level of corruption attaching to the materials and the formatted channelling of proceedings in the Crown Court.

E GALY

via e-mail