The Supreme Court in London decides to extradite Julian Assange to the United States. European Parliamentarian Martin Sonneborn speaks about the issue in an interview.

Mr Sonneborn, you are attending Julian Assange's extradition hearing in London. How has it gone so far?

Sonneborn: Actually very good. There were two submissions that were brilliantly presented by Assange's lawyers. I was in the courtroom and understood almost nothing.

There were reports that the technology left a lot to be desired.

What the British are doing here amounts to sabotage. The world's most important trial over freedom of the press – and it's taking place in the smallest courtroom you can find in the Supreme Court. The court blocked granting internet access outside of England and Wales – so people from the USA, Australia and the EU were unable to connect. Hence there is only room for twenty journalists at the exhibition. With live streaming, postage stamp-sized heads appear on the screen, often with no discernible sound for the first half. We managed to sneak into the hall, and MP Sevim Dagdelen was sitting with the Assange family and he let us in. Germans abroad must band together.

Sonneborn on Assange: “An attempt to silence critical journalism”

What did Assange's lawyers say?

All the arguments are on his side – I have shown once again how crazy it is to accuse a propagandist of publishing true information, including US war crimes. The whole thing is an attempt to criminalize and silence critical journalism. Assange's information was available in Spiegel, The Guardian, and The New York Times.

Assange is accused of espionage. what do you think?

Even if the espionage charge was deemed justified, he would not be allowed to be extradited because that would violate the bilateral extradition treaty between the United States and Great Britain, which includes an explicit ban on political crimes. Espionage is considered a political crime under British law.

An Australian citizen is set to receive a 175-year prison sentence in the USA for exposing US war crimes. I once recommended to my colleagues in the European Union Parliament to show the film „Collateral Murder” on YouTube in one of my speeches. American soldiers can be seen shooting indiscriminately at civilians, children and journalists from a helicopter in Baghdad. The people who committed these war crimes will not be tried. And the man who announced this had been rotting in six-square-meter cells for five years.

Extradition Hearing – Concern about Assange is great

Julian Assange himself was not present on Tuesday. They said he was sick. What do you know about his condition?

There is great concern for him here. He has been detained in a high-security prison for five years, without any valid legal basis. Belmarsh, to make this more descriptive, is the prison where the supervillains in the James Bond films are imprisoned. British food in solitary confinement, with malnutrition, is often an additional torture, as I have just discovered again in London.

At least he was still connected to the last trial, right?

Yes, there was a camera in the cell he was in. Assange suffered a minor stroke during the trial. It must be terrible when you're sitting there listening to lawyers negotiating your fate with other lawyers, and you can't even express yourself. On Tuesday, a luxury cell was prepared for him in the courtroom: a wire cage.

Wire cage?

Yes, you have to imagine it a little like the old Robin Hood movies. A late British Gothic room in which a few light bulbs, some broken microphones and some decorated curtains are hung in front of the high windows. On the front left was a few square metres, perhaps larger than his cell, which was surrounded by huge black bars. This is where Assange was supposed to sit.

The petitions claimed that Assange was accused of a political crime and that Britain was not allowed to extradite him because of a related treaty with the United States. What to expect for day two?

On Wednesday, the American side filed its charges under the Espionage Act, a law dating back to World War I. In fact, I don't see what would be great in terms of content. However, we know of course that the final decision will be made in Washington whether to halt this process or continue it until the bitter end.

'It's not enough': Sonneborn on lack of support for Assange

Do you have the impression that the number of Assange supporters has decreased? In Germany, many Green leaders have remained virtually silent. What does the situation look like in the European Parliament?

I think there are three MEPs here. This is very little. I saw Andrzej Honko and Sevim Dagdelen from the Bundestag and Jeremy Corbyn from the Labor Party. It is very unfortunate that more politicians are not defending Assange. It's about absolute basic rights, and it's about these Western values ​​that we always vocalize when it suits us. Unfortunately, both Baerbock and Habeck, who had publicly called for Assange's release before the government took office, promptly forgot their demands in their offices. Fortunately, there were a relatively large number of people on the streets of London.

It was previously said that Julian Assange could be extradited to the United States within a few days after the hearing. How do you rate that?

So, based on everything I've heard, I think Democrats don't want to have a third contentious issue before the presidential election in addition to the problem areas of Ukraine and the Middle East. I think it will not be delivered at the moment. Assange may remain detained in his cell until the US elections.

Supporters demand freedom for Julian Assange. But if he is not extradited to the US after the hearing, but remains imprisoned in Belmarsh, it will only be a victory. On what legal basis can he continue to be detained?

The court may postpone its pending decision indefinitely. Assange has hardly any contact with his family. He has two young children and a wife. This is very stressful for everyone. An example is made here.

Assange case: Every whistleblower will 'think three times' in the future

What do you mean?

In the future, all whistleblowers will think three times whether they really want to expose government crimes. But I think everyone understands that at this point, so: release Assange! There is a public interest in uncovering Secret Service and military crimes.

We have published a 32-page booklet on the case, which can be downloaded from my home page. This is the only semi-official document from the EU Parliament in which Assange's name is mentioned. Otherwise, the major parties will work to distance him from even the smallest mention on any sub-point, even in the least important decisions. In our documentary, which is unfortunately not at all satirical, and even a bit controversial at times when the story becomes too tiresome, it becomes clear that Mike “Fatty” Pompeo is waging a vendetta against him.

Mike Pompeo, former Secretary of State and former CIA Director?

Yes. Assange has posted via WikiLeaks that the CIA not only conducts mass surveillance and espionage on governments and citizens around the world, but also – and this is against US law – on its own American citizens. It is capable of invading all computers and even taking over Internet-connected home appliances, even steering your car or turning your refrigerator into a well-stocked listening device. Pompeo took this personally, and the CIA then hatched a plan to kidnap and kill Assange. Approved by the White House. How do you want to extradite a person to a country that was planning to kill him?

I said that at the European Union level they avoid mentioning Assange's name. what is the reason?

I think that at the moment under Ms. von der Leyen's leadership, we are very close to the United States and NATO. This is anti-European and contrary to the Treaty. The Assange case is important to the highest levels of government in the United States; Every US president has pursued him, from Obama to Trump to Biden.

“There are two reasons”: Sonneborn is running for the EU Parliament again

Another question about your renewed candidacy for membership in the European Union Parliament. What motivates you to do this – the final part of idealism?

There are two reasons why we are competing again. The first is: We don't want to get kicked out the door. The CDU and SPD have passed an electoral law reform that violates the constitution and aims to keep us out of parliament using a threshold clause. The real accusation: very bad jokes and too much transparency. We are currently conducting member dispute procedures, and the Federal Constitutional Court recently informed President Steinmeier that he should not prepare the new electoral law at this time. Smiling

I think the accusation of transparency is more serious, right?

Exactly, and this is also the second reason: we can create transparency. Your colleagues here in Brussels are not that critical. But in the European Union we are moving more and more towards surveillance, extra-treaty militarization, and discrimination of opinions. I would like to continue to make all of these things transparent.

Interview: Christine is grateful