News is circulating last night and today that Julian Assange may not be staying at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for much longer. (https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-05-25/julian-assange-situation-unusually-bad-ecuador-may-evict-embassy-any-day-now) Whether he is kicked out or chooses to leave rather than live like a prisoner, he will eventually be on his way and the question that one cannot help but ponder is what will become of him once he exits the diplomatic sanctuary that he has called home for nearly six years. Below is some discussion on key questions regarding his ultimate departure.
What might happen to him once he departs?
It seems unlikely that he will find safe passage to another safe haven. If such an arrangement could have conceivably been made, it would likely have occurred by now. While there may be countries that would take him (Russia, as was the case with Snowden?), there does not seem to be a way to broker a transfer to a sovereign jurisdiction without passage through Great Britain's territory (the streets of London).
So if Assange leaves the confines of the embassy grounds, he will essentially resume his status as a fugitive, as there appears to be every indication that the British have an arrest warrant our for him and that the Americans have already - years ago - prepared charges against him. In all likelihood, he would be arrested by British authorities and remanded into custody while they figure out what to do with him.
Will he be deported?
As the article above notes, the US has never publicly confirmed that it has an extradition request into London. That does not mean that one doesn't exist. The real determining factor here will be whether the US wishes to continue on with charging and trying Assange. There is the possibility, of course, that they will decide that he is not worth the hassle and bad publicity. Like Snowden, he is apt to expose some incredibly embarrassing information about the US and other countries. If pushed into a corner, most people think he has left behind a poison pill of sorts in the form of a cache of files full of scandalous information.
Assuming though that they do wish to try Assange, it is most likely that the British government would comply with the extradition request. It is unclear whether his country of origin (Australia) or his adopted country of citizenship (Ecuador) would in any way intervene. The Americans generally seem to get their way with extraditions.
What is the legal case against Assange?
This is where it gets confusing. If Assange thought that he could get a fair trial and believed that the charges against him were defensible, he probably would have sought exoneration years ago. The fact that he remains in hiding is a sign that a) he does not expect to get a fair trial; and b) he expects the charges against him to be heavy-handed. The simple defense for the his publciation of classified US documents in 2010 would be to argue that he did not steal or hack these documents and that he was within his right to post them once he - a rank and file member of the public - came to possess them. It would not be that simple, however, if he were to be characterized as some sort of enemy combatant. If he is deemed to be such, he could rot in Gitmo or some similar place for years before getting a trial.
At this point, it's somewhat hard to see a case being made on any basis other than trumping up some national security charges but that is likely exactly what Mr. Assange is fearing. It's unlikely that the US would go to all the trouble of extradition just because they wanted him to get a fair trial. Even if the President himself might not be interested in pursuing Assange, he relies heavily on being seen favourably by the military and law enforcement to maintain his legitimacy and he may have no choice but to allow proceedings against Assange to take place.
Is there anything to be gained from trying him?
I'll give you my best lawyer's answer: Maybe! While it certainly does not seem to me that Assange deserves to spend the rest of his life in an American jail, there is also a lot of information that he allegedly has within his control that could be disclosed for the betterment of society. For example, wouldn't it be helpful to know who actually leaked the DNC emails to Wikileaks in 2016. Assange knows and has apparently said it was not a state actor but maybe actually telling us who would finally allow people to form sensible opinions about what (if any) Russian involvement existed. Sometimes we seem to discount the value of truth and reconciliation in today's world. Maybe Assange would deserve immunity if he would actually shed some light on some key topics. In this age of paradigm shift, it might be worth pondering whether there is value to such an exchange. I doubt at this point much would be gained by throwing him in jail. It would not end Wikileaks and would likely bring little closure to those so appalled by his leaking of classified military information.
I am totally confused by what SHOULD happen to Assange. If you have any thoughts, please leave a comment.
CW