WikiLeaks boss Assange acted as a foreign spy, Uncle Sam exclaims in fresh rap sheet • The Register

Julian Assange has been indicted by the US government on 18 counts of violating the Espionage Act, expanding the legal case against him and raising significant free speech issues.

The Department of Justice announced on Thursday that it was effectively accusing the WikiLeaks founder of having acted as a foreign spy when he published hundreds of thousands of highly confidential US government reports, including war logs and diplomatic messages.

Assange spent years holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, England, after avoiding a probe into sexual assault allegations against him in Sweden. Then last month, Assange was handed over to the UK authorities by Ecuadorian officials: he was jailed for 50 weeks for breaking his bail conditions in Britain. Meanwhile, Uncle Sam has started extradition proceedings against him.

The US government initially charged Assange with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, which could lead to a five-year jail sentence if convicted. These latest charges [PDF] expand that case to the more serious issue of espionage, which would come with lengthier sentences, possibly even an effective life sentence.

"If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison on each count except for conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, for which he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison," the DoJ's said.

What is unsaid is that the US government is seeking to make an example of a man who has actively annoying the American authorities for over a decade.

Charging Assange under the Espionage Act does, however, raise significant free speech questions, especially since Assange is likely to argue that his actions were protected under the First Amendment.

The US government has never charged a journalist under the Espionage Act so there is no clear precedent over the extent to which a journalist's work – including receiving and publishing confidential documents - is protected by the First Amendment.

Journalist or spy?

However, the US government is likely to argue that Assange is not in fact a journalist. Which on one level is perfectly true – he does not act as a conventional journalist in that he doesn't produce or edit stories. But at the same time many of the methods he employs to get hold of information and made it publicly available are effectively the same, making it hard to draw a distinction.

The US government has had years to explore the issue and presumably feels it has a winnable case against the controversial figure. It is not clear where the Department of Justice will try to draw distinctions in the internet era between what the Fourth Estate does and what Assange and Wikileaks have done.

The DoJ points to Assange's active assistance of former intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in getting hold of the documents and what it claims was an active decision to "injure" the United States.

Julian Assange jailed for 50 weeks over Ecuador embassy bail-jumping

READ MORE

"Assange was complicit… in unlawfully obtaining and disclosing classified documents related to the national defense," the announcement reads. "Assange conspired with Manning; obtained from Manning and aided and abetted her in obtaining classified information with reason to believe that the information was to be used to the injury of the United States or the advantage of a foreign nation."

It also noted that WikiLeaks published "the unredacted names of human sources who provided information to United States forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to US State Department diplomats around the world."

Again, this appears to be a distinction between WikiLeaks and the work of journalists, who went to some lengths to remove the names of individuals when they wrote about the same documents.

"Assange’s actions risked serious harm to United States national security to the benefit of our adversaries and put the unredacted named human sources at a grave and imminent risk of serious physical harm and/or arbitrary detention," the announcement states.

Whatever happens it is certain to be very carefully watched and will likely have very significant implications in future. ®

Sponsored:
The Total Economic Impact Of The CB Predictive Security Cloud

Comments are closed.