They ask that the extradition proceedings initiated against her be archived.
A group of lawyers and law scholars sent an open letter to the UK authorities expressing their «serious concerns about violations of Julian Assange’s fundamental rights» and demanding her immediate release.
After the Ecuadorian government of Lenín Moreno withdrew diplomatic asylum to the founder of Wikileaks, in April 2019, Assange is in legal custody of the United Kingdom government.
After more than a year and a half, the process has had several questions and there is a threat of extradition to the United States.
The collective, “Lawyers for Assange” explains that the extradition would be illegal for lack of guarantee that the procedural rights of the Assange trial would be protected in the United States.
«Assange has been charged and will be tried in the infamous ‘espionage court’ in secret proceedings before a jury chosen by a population in which the majority of people eligible for jury selection work for the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency) , NSA (National Security Agency), DoD (Ministry of Defense) or DoS (Department of State) ”.
They denounce that there was a “constant and criminal surveillance” of video and audio, during their stay at the Ecuadorian Embassy in England, carried out by the Spanish security firm, UC Global.
“This surveillance has triggered an investigation into the owner of UC Global, David Morales, by the Superior Court of Spain, the National Court. According to witness statements, the surveillance would have been directly ordered by the CIA, which UC Global was reportedly responsible for transmitting the collected information directly to the United States intelligence services, ”says the letter sent to the UK authorities. .
They recall that the UK has a duty to protect Assange’s right to life and the ban on extradition is absolute and therefore no exception can be made available under any circumstances including war, public emergency or terrorist threat .
In addition, they denounced that, in a single day, on February 22, «the prison authorities handcuffed him 11 times, placed him in five different cells, stripped him and searched him twice, and confiscated all his legal and confidential documents.»
Despite this complaint made before the Court of Justice, the lawyers criticize that the magistrate, Vanessa Baraitser, explicitly refused to intervene with the prison authorities, alleging that she had no jurisdiction over the custody conditions.
Therefore, they demand a fair and public hearing before an independent and impartial court, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, the right to be informed immediately and in detail about the nature and cause of the charges, the right to have adequate time and facilities for defense preparation and the right to communicate with their attorneys.