Assange Pleads Guilty to Freedom, Returns to Australia

Article/Blessing CALD Editorial；Photo/Internet

15 mins audio

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange arrived in the Australian capital, Canberra, on June 26, returning to his homeland. Earlier in the day, he was released from the U.S. federal court in Saipan after pleading guilty to violating the U.S. Espionage Act and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment equal to the one he had already served in the United Kingdom. In response, Australian Prime Minister Albanese called Assange’s release a “welcome development”.

World Legend
Born in Australia in 1971, Assange became famous for his programming as a teenager, was fined for hacking in 1995, and co-authored a best-selling book about the Internet. 2006, at the age of 35, Assange founded the WikiLeaks website. Since then, the wheels of fate have been turning: the site has exposed a wealth of classified files from countries around the world, including the United States, related to war, espionage and corruption.　The revelations were not only eye-opening, but they were also hated by governments around the globe, and there was nothing they could do about it. The release of classified U.S. government files has severely damaged the diplomatic image of the United States. As a result, Assange became a thorn in the side of the U.S. government and was caught up in a protracted legal battle, beginning a 14-year period of exile and imprisonment.
However, WikiLeaks’ disclosure of these files was supported by many people around the world, and Assange received the most support in the 2010 Time Magazine People of the Year poll because of his disclosure of the U.S. government’s behavior in the Afghanistan war. However, in the end, Time Magazine did not put Assange on the cover, and chose Elun Musk, who received less than 1/20th of the votes. Judging from the impact of Musk on the world today, we can say that Time Magazine made the right choice back then.

However, in the following 14 years, from being regarded as a hero by the whole world, Assange had to face the global manhunt of the United States, a global power, alone, which started his journey to fight against the US government with his own strength, and became the most legendary page of his life.

Freedom after 14 years of struggle

After Assange’s revelations about the “Land of Light”, the Swedish government prosecutor’s office once accused him of rape and sexual harassment. Assange’s application for political asylum was rejected, and he is wanted by Interpol worldwide ……. The two are in a state of siege. In 2012, Assange was released on bail and hid in the Ecuadorian embassy in the United Kingdom, where he has been hiding for the past seven years. Since then, the political situation in Ecuador has changed, in 2019, the Ecuadorian side no longer provide asylum to Assange, the British police immediately arrested Assange on the grounds of violating the bail regulations; in the highest security factor in London, England, Belmarsh Prison, Assange in a 3-meter-long, 2-meter-wide cell, spent 1,901 days.

During this period, the U.S. requested Assange’s extradition on the grounds that WikiLeaks had endangered the lives of others by publishing classified documents involving U.S. aircraft. The U.S. government has filed 17 charges against Assange, including violations of the Espionage Act. If convicted on all counts, he will be sentenced to 175 years in prison. The turbulence of his life and the restrictions on his activities did not stop Assange from continuing to “uncover” US “dark information”: at the time of the 2016 US election, WikiLeaks disclosed a series of private emails from then presidential candidate Hillary Hillary, triggering the “Emailgate” incident; the following year, Assange once again disclosed thousands of pages of classified CIA files, exposing “the CIA’s ability to carry out all hacking attacks”.

It was not until June of this year, after countless court hearings, rulings, appeals, and a long period of waiting, perseverance, and appeals, that news broke that Assange had reached a plea of guilty with the U.S. side. According to the plea agreement reached between the US Department of Justice and Assange, the US Department of Justice will still seek to sentence Assange to imprisonment, but this is equal to his previously completed sentence in London. Therefore, the US side recognizes that Assange has completed his sentence, and waives its previous extradition request for him to return to his country of origin, Australia.

After 14 years of “self-imposed exile” and imprisonment, Assange’s greatest reward was marrying his current wife, Stella Assange, and having two children. Stella, whose real name is Sara Gonzalez Devant, is a Swedish and Spanish national born in Johannesburg, South Africa, and is a human rights lawyer who became part of Assange’s legal team in 2011. The two began dating in 2015 when Assange was living alone in his ambassador’s house in Ecuador, and became engaged in 2017, marrying in 2022 in a British prison. It’s been a long time coming, and Stella has been campaigning for Assange’s freedom for a long time.

On the evening of June 26, Stella and Assange’s father were the first family members to welcome Assange back to Australia at Canberra Airport and held a press conference on his behalf. However, Assange and Stella’s two sons will not see their father for the first time until later.

Chilling effect lingers

The U.S. government’s accusations against Assange have sparked outrage among supporters around the world, who have questioned the criminalization of Assange as a threat to freedom of expression. WikiLeaks has stated that Assange’s release was the result of a global solidarity campaign that included grassroots organizations, press freedom activists, leaders from across the political spectrum, and even the U.N. Albanys has made his release a priority since he was elected Prime Minister of Australia in 2022. It is clear that a breakthrough in the 14-year Assange case is a sign of a change in the political winds.

The media has said that such a plea agreement is not uncommon in U.S. espionage cases. If the case goes to trial, there is a risk that some of the “intelligence sources and methods” used by the U.S. military and government will be exposed. Although the U.S. side has long argued that Assange’s actions went beyond journalism or whistleblowing, and that his actions in soliciting, stealing, and indiscriminately releasing classified documents have endangered innocent lives, the conclusion of the case now allows the U.S. military and government to extricate themselves from a confusing legal dispute. In some ways, the result is a “win-win” situation.

U.S. diplomats are keen to protect relations with Australia, with whom the U.S. has entered into a so-called “AUKUS” defense and security partnership with the United Kingdom. The Assange case has also long been a thorny issue in UK-US relations, and many diplomats have been keen to resolve it. Pollack, Assange’s U.S. attorney, has also pointed out that although Assange has admitted to violating the Espionage Act, the law is fundamentally flawed and inconsistent with the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The indictment itself sets a dangerous precedent, and is undoubtedly a threat to journalists around the world in their pursuit of free speech and democratic accountability.

It is important to realize that WikiLeaks is doing exactly what the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was created to do: it guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press, and in the process gives people the right to speak out against government abuses of power. It’s a vital check on the big stick of power wielded by the government. The prosecution of Assange has meant the prosecution of prominent news organizations such as the New York Times and the Washington Post. The case has had such a chilling effect on public interest journalism that it’s hard to imagine that it hasn’t deterred potential whistle-blowers and journalists. It is unclear whether future U.S. administrations are likely to use Assange’s guilty plea as a way to use the Espionage Act to combat objectionable news reporting.

A promising future

On Assange’s return to Australia, Prime Minister Albanese said that people have different opinions about Assange, but the case that has dragged on for so long is finally over, and Assange has finally been reunited with his family. It’s a happy thing for Australians after all. The Albanese government had no plans to pay for Assange’s return, and WikiLeaks said the cost of chartering a plane to bring him home would be about $778,000, while a crowdfunding campaign raised more than $700,000 in the hours it took for Assange to board the plane home. Assange remains a controversial figure in the eyes of the public, with some praising him as a defender of freedom of speech and freedom of the press, while others deride him as a criminal who has evaded justice.

On the one hand, Assange and his supporters portray him as a hero who fights for freedom of speech and exposes darkness, crying out for justice for all mankind, a mantis; on the other hand, leaks without considering the consequences not only jeopardize the national interests of countries such as the United States, but also threaten the lives of individuals engaged in covert work. Different perspectives determine different, even opposite, conclusions. Today, perhaps people should focus more on the implications of Assange’s guilty plea. Although a plea agreement does not have the precedential effect of a court decision, it will still hang over everyone’s head for years to come. Joyce, a member of the Australian Parliament, said that although he personally dislikes Assange, this incident has exposed the “extraterritoriality” of the United States, which is really worrying.

Behind closed doors, the public is accustomed to government officials exchanging sentiments that are often different from what they state publicly. But much of what WikiLeaks has revealed is nonetheless alarming – and the leaks highlight the promise and risks of rapid global communication. In a world where individuals can disrupt global strategic programs, powerful governments struggle to contain the spread of harm. It is a dramatic demonstration of the tension between private and public statements, between the demands of freedom of speech and the need for secrecy. The very existence of the WikiLeaks website, and what happened to Assange and the many whistle-blowers, may itself represent the absence of an international system.

The fact that Assange has been released does not mean that he will not be persecuted in the future; after all, he has tarnished the image of “democracy and freedom” that the U.S. has always boasted of. From youthful ambition to exile to prison, Assange’s life has taken many twists and turns, and now that he’s free, it’s hard to say that the dust has settled. After all, there is no such thing as unrestricted, abstract and absolute freedom of the press, and on the road to freedom, there is no shortage of fellow travelers.

Assange and Lai Chi Ying

Assange’s release signifies that in the United States, Britain and Australia, where the Western media is the watchdog of the government, in the face of freedom of the press challenging the authority of the government, they must ultimately face the will of the people, and must not use their power to the fullest extent to suppress dissenting voices. Although Assange chose to plead guilty and no longer insisted on being a martyr, people generally expressed sympathy and understanding for him, but still criticized the US government.

Assange’s legal team has called on the world to press the US government to grant him a pardon, to show that the US government has been wronged, and to recognize the importance of people’s right to know. Of course, there are political considerations in these actions, but in a democratic society, there is still a chance for them to happen, because the government has to take into account the direction of public opinion.

Similarly, in Hong Kong, a society that used to be free but not democratic, the 76-year-old publisher of the Apple Daily, Lai Chi-ying, has been accused of violating the national security law, tried and is still in jail awaiting judgment for more than three years because of his different political stance from the government. In a society where the government regards the media as its propaganda machine, and does not recognize the freedom of its citizens to obtain different information, Lai has to face the oppression of the Hong Kong (and China?) government alone. Lai still had to face the oppression of the Hong Kong (and Chinese?) government alone. Lai does not have the same global support and recognition as Assange, because China’s strong control of the media is publicizing to Chinese around the world the damage Lai is doing to national security. Many Chinese in China and Hong Kong lack the analytical skills to accept the government’s propaganda and give up their freedom of information.

However, in Australia, a free and democratic country, how will the Chinese people here face this problem? Lai Zhiying’s son, Sebastien Lai, and Caoilfhionn Gallagher KC, a lawyer representing his father and Hong Kong’s Next Media founder Lai Zhiying, attended a symposium at the National Press Club in Australia on July 1, and called on the Australian government to join the ranks of other democracies such as the United Kingdom and the United States in calling for the release of the imprisoned. The Australian government also called on the Australian government to join the ranks of other democratic countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States in demanding the release of the imprisoned Lai Chi Ying. In Canberra, Mr. Lai and his legal team also met with the Foreign Minister, Mr. Wong Ying-yin. Later, Mr. Wong also posted on social media X that “Australia is deeply concerned about the widespread use of Hong Kong’s national security laws to suppress civil society and prosecute journalists like Jimmy Lai,” he said.

Both Assange and Lai are in prison for the government’s crackdown on the media, and the chances of Lai getting out of Hong Kong don’t look too good. For those who care about press freedom, these are sadly different outcomes.