A ruling against WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange in USA

Whether to lead WikiLeaks’ founder Julian Assange to the United States? Today, the British courts are considering a big announcement. This has little to do, however, about whether the actions of Julian Assange are considered a crime or not. It is expected that the decision will conclude around 7 p.m. Time in Korean. Assange will face up to 175 years in US court, assuming up to 175 years in jail.

A verdict is due shortly against WikiLeaks’ chief, Julian Assange. The United States refers to Assange as a spy, because if tried in a U.S. court, you will face up to 175 years in prison if a British court determines not to deliver the notorious figure to the United States. It is understood that Assange is incredibly terrified of being delivered to the United States.

image from bbc.com

The decision will be taken over by Judge Vanessa Braitser, and it will be settled on Monday at 10am GMT. 10 A.M. GMT is 7 P.M. Time in Korean. In front of the court where the trial is being held, many supporters of Assanji are crowding out and shouting’freedom of the press’. While the United States sees him as a traitor, it is argued by his followers that Assanji is a real journalist who conducts open knowledge disclosure directly.

In 2010, via WikiLeaks, Assange accessed US government agencies’ websites to reveal classified data linked to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq at the time and information that was in and out of diplomatic channels.

The partnership was skewed a great deal. MIT professor and esteemed opinion maker Noam Chomsky said in an interview with Al Jazeera that Assange would finally come to the United States and receive the highest sentence.

Of note, just because Assange’s trip to the United States today was determined by the British court does not mean that he will be flying to the United States tomorrow.

Since he is now refusing to go to the United States, it is anticipated that he will go through an appeal process against today’s ruling, and for this reason, without guarantee, the final arrival date will be postponed. Assange would have to spend a long period in a British jail if a British court stopped him from moving to the United States.

Assange’s followers are not opposed to extradition to the United States purely for the safety of Assange.

They claim that, in the future, such a decision will continue to violate press freedom. That is why, on the opposite, it is clear that supporters would view Assange’s triumph, or more accurately,’ the victory of freedom of speech’ even though Assange resides in a British jail.

For comparison, the British court would not denounce the previous acts of Assange as guilty or innocent in this courtroom. It is only through judges that the extradition deal between the United States and the United Kingdom will be extended to Assange. In addition, the court’s decision is not binding.

If a decision to surrender to the United States is made, so the UK Home Secretary must accept it. The verdict on this line may naturally be reversed. Of note, the Minister of Interior does not have a decision whether Assanji appeals.

If Assanji goes to the United States after all the trials, the next President Biden will definitely be the one who will have the biggest effect on his decision on punishment or amnesty. Yet Biden once referred to Assange as vice president as a “terrorist armed with high-tech”. It seems doubtful, therefore, that Biden will pardon him. Recently, President Trump has pardoned some felony prisoners, but the intention was not Assanji.

For this cause, his advice is impossible to be decided purely on a legal principle. Even if Judge Veracher determines at a strictly judicial basis, at any stage, the political role is bound to interfere because it includes the British Minister of the Interior and the next President of the United States. “there is a high possibility of receiving the highest sentence.”there is a high likelihood of receiving the highest sentence.”criminal activity should not be wrapped in journalism.”criminal activity should not be wrapped in journalism.