[ad_1]
The persecution of Julian Assange
Jonathan Cook dinner
Wed, 05/04/2022 – 13:38
The British residence secretary, Priti Patel, will determine this month whether or not Julian Assange is to be extradited to the USA, the place he faces a sentence of as much as 175 years – served almost definitely in strict, 24-hour isolation in a US super-max jail.
He has already spent three years in equally harsh circumstances in London’s high-security Belmarsh jail.
The 18 prices laid towards Assange within the US relate to the publication by WikiLeaks in 2010 of leaked official paperwork, lots of them displaying that the US and UK have been accountable for conflict crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. Nobody has been dropped at justice for these crimes.
As an alternative, the US has outlined Assange’s journalism as espionage – and by implication asserted a proper to grab any journalist on the earth who takes on the US nationwide safety state – and in a collection of extradition hearings, the British courts have given their blessing.
The prolonged proceedings towards Assange have been carried out in courtrooms with tightly restricted entry and in circumstances which have repeatedly denied journalists the power to cowl the case correctly.
Regardless of the grave implications for a free press and democratic accountability, nevertheless, Assange’s plight has provoked little greater than a flicker of concern from a lot of the western media.
Few observers seem like in any doubt that Patel will log out on the US extradition order – least of all Nils Melzer, a legislation professor, and a United Nations’ particular rapporteur.
In his position because the UN’s professional on torture, Melzer has made it his job since 2019 to scrutinise not solely Assange’s remedy throughout his 12 years of accelerating confinement – overseen by the UK courts – but additionally the extent to which due course of and the rule of legislation have been adopted in pursuing the WikiLeaks founder.
Melzer has distilled his detailed analysis into a brand new ebook, The Trial of Julian Assange, that gives a stunning account of rampant lawlessness by the primary states concerned – Britain, Sweden, the US, and Ecuador. It additionally paperwork a classy marketing campaign of misinformation and character assassination to obscure these misdeeds.
The outcome, Melzer concludes, has been a relentless assault not solely on Assange’s elementary rights however his bodily, psychological, and emotional wellbeing that Melzer classifies as psychological torture.
The UN rapporteur argues that the UK has invested far an excessive amount of cash and muscle in securing Assange’s prosecution on behalf of the US, and has too urgent a necessity itself to discourage others from following Assange’s path in exposing western crimes, to threat letting Assange stroll free.
It has as a substitute participated in a wide-ranging authorized charade to obscure the political nature of Assange’s incarceration. And in doing so, it has systematically ridden roughshod over the rule of legislation.
Melzer believes Assange’s case is so necessary as a result of it units a precedent to erode probably the most fundamental liberties the remainder of us take without any consideration. He opens the ebook with a quote from Otto Gritschneder, a German lawyer who noticed up shut the rise of the Nazis, “those that sleep in a democracy will get up in a dictatorship”.
Again to the wall
Melzer has raised his voice as a result of he believes that within the Assange case any residual institutional checks and balances on state energy, particularly these of the US, have been subdued.
He factors out that even the distinguished human rights group Amnesty Worldwide has averted characterising Assange as a “prisoner of conscience”, regardless of his assembly all the standards, with the group apparently scared of a backlash from funders (p81).
He notes too that, except for the UN’s Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, comprising professional legislation professors, the UN itself has largely ignored the abuses of Assange’s rights (p3). Largely, that’s as a result of even states like Russia and China are reluctant to show Assange’s political persecution right into a persist with which to beat the West – as may in any other case have been anticipated.
His 330-page ebook is so full of examples of abuses of due course of that it’s unattainable to summarise even a tiny fraction of them
The rationale, Melzer observes, is that WikiLeaks’ mannequin of journalism calls for higher accountability and transparency from all states. With Ecuador’s belated abandonment of Assange, he seems to be completely on the mercy of the world’s predominant superpower.
As an alternative, Melzer argues, Britain and the US have cleared the way in which to vilify Assange and incrementally disappear him below the pretence of a collection of authorized proceedings. That has been made doable solely due to complicity from prosecutors and the judiciary, who’re pursuing the trail of least resistance in silencing Assange and the trigger he represents.
It’s what Melzer phrases an official “coverage of small compromises” – with dramatic penalties (p250-1).
His 330-page ebook is so full of examples of abuses of due course of – on the authorized, prosecutorial, and judicial ranges – that it’s unattainable to summarise even a tiny fraction of them.
Nonetheless, the UN rapporteur refuses to label this as a conspiracy – if solely as a result of to take action could be to indict himself as a part of it. He admits that when Assange’s attorneys first contacted him for assist in 2018, arguing that the circumstances of Assange’s incarceration amounted to torture, he ignored their pleas.
As he now recognises, he too had been influenced by the demonisation of Assange, regardless of his lengthy skilled and tutorial coaching to recognise methods of notion administration and political persecution.
“To me, like most individuals all over the world, he was only a rapist, hacker, spy, and narcissist,” he says (p10).
It was solely later when Melzer lastly agreed to look at the results of Assange’s long-term confinement on his well being – and located the British authorities obstructing his investigation at each flip and overtly deceiving him – that he probed deeper. When he began to choose on the authorized narratives round Assange, the threads rapidly unravelled.
He factors to the dangers of talking up – a worth he has skilled firsthand – which have stored others silent.
“With my uncompromising stance, I put not solely my credibility in danger, but additionally my profession and, doubtlessly, even my private security… Now, I instantly discovered myself with my again to the wall, defending human rights and the rule of legislation towards the very democracies which I had all the time thought-about to be my closest allies within the battle towards torture. It was a steep and painful studying curve” (p97).
He provides regretfully: “I had inadvertently change into a dissident inside the system itself” (p269).
Subversion of legislation
The net of advanced instances which have ensnared the WikiLeaks founder – and stored him incarcerated – have included a completely unproductive, decade-long sexual assault investigation by Sweden; an prolonged detention over a bail infraction that occurred after Assange was granted asylum by Ecuador from political extradition to the US; and the key convening of a grand jury within the US, adopted by limitless hearings and appeals within the UK to extradite him as a part of the very political persecution he warned of.
The objective all through, says Melzer, has not been to expedite Assange’s prosecution – that may have risked exposing the absence of proof towards him in each the Swedish and US instances. Quite it has been to entice Assange in an interminable strategy of non-prosecution whereas he’s imprisoned in ever-more draconian circumstances and the general public turned towards him.
What appeared – at the very least to onlookers – to be the upholding of the legislation in Sweden, Britain and the US was the precise reverse: its repeated subversion. The failure to observe fundamental authorized procedures was so constant, argues Melzer, that it can’t be seen as merely a collection of unlucky errors.
It goals on the “systematic persecution, silencing and destruction of an inconvenient political dissident”. (p93)
Assange, in Melzer’s view, is not only a political prisoner. He’s one whose life is being put in extreme hazard from relentless abuses that accord with the definition of psychological torture.
Such torture depends upon its sufferer being intimidated, remoted, humiliated, and subjected to arbitrary selections (p74). Melzer clarifies that the results of such torture not solely break down the psychological and emotional coping mechanisms of victims however over time have very tangible bodily penalties too.
Melzer explains the so-called “Mandela Guidelines” – named after the long-jailed black resistance chief Nelson Mandela, who helped convey down South African apartheid – that restrict the usage of excessive types of solitary confinement.
In Assange’s case, nevertheless, “this type of ill-treatment in a short time turned the established order” in Belmarsh, although Assange was a “non-violent inmate posing no risk to anybody”. As his well being deteriorated, jail authorities remoted him additional, professedly for his personal security. Because of this, Melzer concludes, Assange’s “silencing and abuse could possibly be perpetuated indefinitely, all below the guise of concern for his well being”. (p88-9)
Learn Extra »
The rapporteur observes that he wouldn’t be fulfilling his UN mandate if he did not protest not solely Assange’s torture however the truth that he’s being tortured to guard those that dedicated torture and different conflict crimes uncovered within the Iraq and Afghanistan logs printed by WikiLeaks. They proceed to flee justice with the lively connivance of the identical state authorities searching for to destroy Assange (p95).
Along with his lengthy expertise of dealing with torture instances all over the world, Melzer means that Assange has nice reserves of internal power which have stored him alive, if more and more frail and bodily unwell. Assange has misplaced a substantial amount of weight, is commonly confused and disorientated, and has suffered a minor stroke in Belmarsh.
Lots of the remainder of us, the reader is left to deduce, may nicely have succumbed by now to a deadly coronary heart assault or stroke, or have dedicated suicide.
An additional troubling implication hangs over the ebook: that that is the final word ambition of these persecuting him. The present extradition hearings will be spun out indefinitely, with appeals proper as much as the European Court docket of Human Rights in Strasbourg, conserving Assange out of view all that point, additional damaging his well being, and offering a stronger deterrent impact on whistleblowers and different journalists.
This can be a win-win, notes Melzer. If Assange’s psychological well being breaks down fully, he will be locked away in a psychiatric establishment. And if he dies, that may lastly remedy the inconvenience of sustaining the authorized charade that has been wanted to maintain him silenced and out of view for thus lengthy (p322).
Sweden’s charade
Melzer spends a lot of the ebook reconstructing the 2010 accusations of sexual assault towards Assange in Sweden. He does this to not discredit the 2 ladies concerned – the truth is, he argues that the Swedish authorized system failed them as a lot because it did Assange – however as a result of that case set the stage for the marketing campaign to color Assange as a rapist, narcissist, and fugitive from justice.
The US may by no means have been in a position to launch its overtly political persecution of Assange had he not already been become a well-liked hate determine over the Sweden case. His demonisation was wanted – in addition to his disappearance from view – to clean the trail to redefining nationwide safety journalism as espionage.
Melzer’s meticulous examination of the case – assisted by his fluency in Swedish – reveals one thing that the mainstream media protection has ignored: Swedish prosecutors by no means had the illusion of a case towards Assange, and apparently by no means the slightest intention to maneuver the investigation past the preliminary taking of witness statements.
The allegations towards Assange have been so clearly unsustainable that the Swedish authorities by no means sought to noticeably examine them. To take action would have immediately uncovered their futility
Nonetheless, as Melzer observes, it turned “the longest ‘preliminary investigation’ in Swedish historical past” (p103).
The primary prosecutor to look at the case, in 2010, instantly dropped the investigation, saying, “there isn’t a suspicion of a criminal offense” (p133).
When the case was lastly wrapped up in 2019, many months earlier than the statute of limitations was reached, a 3rd prosecutor noticed merely that “it can’t be assumed that additional inquiries will change the evidential state of affairs in any important method” (p261).
Couched in lawyerly language, that was an admission that interviewing Assange wouldn’t result in any prices. The previous 9 years had been a authorized charade.
However in these intervening years, the phantasm of a reputable case was so nicely sustained that main newspapers, together with Britain’s The Guardian newspaper, repeatedly referred to “rape prices” towards Assange, although he had by no means been charged with something.
Extra considerably, as Melzer retains mentioning, the allegations towards Assange have been so clearly unsustainable that the Swedish authorities by no means sought to noticeably examine them. To take action would have immediately uncovered their futility.
As an alternative, Assange was trapped. For the seven years that he was given asylum in Ecuador’s London embassy, Swedish prosecutors refused to observe regular procedures and interview him the place he was, in individual or by way of laptop, to resolve the case. However the identical prosecutors additionally refused to subject customary reassurances that he wouldn’t be extradited onwards to the US, which might have made his asylum within the embassy pointless.
On this method, Melzer argues “the rape suspect narrative could possibly be perpetuated indefinitely with out ever coming earlier than a courtroom. Publicly, this intentionally manufactured final result might conveniently be blamed on Assange, by accusing him of getting evaded justice” (p254).
Neutrality dropped
Finally, the success of the Swedish case in vilifying Assange derived from the truth that it was pushed by a story nearly unattainable to query with out showing to belittle the 2 ladies at its centre.
However the rape narrative was not the ladies’s. It was successfully imposed on the case – and on them – by components inside the Swedish institution, echoed by the Swedish media. Melzer hazards a guess as to why the possibility to discredit Assange was seized on so aggressively.
After the autumn of the Soviet Union, Swedish leaders dropped the nation’s historic place of neutrality and threw their hand in with the US and the worldwide “conflict on terror”. Stockholm was rapidly built-in into the western safety and intelligence group (p102).
All of that was put in jeopardy as Assange started eyeing Sweden as a brand new base for WikiLeaks, attracted by its constitutional protections for publishers.
In actual fact, he was in Sweden for exactly that purpose within the run-up to WikiLeaks’ publication of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflict logs. It will need to have been solely too apparent to the Swedish institution that any transfer to headquarter WikiLeaks there risked setting Stockholm on a collision course with Washington (p159).
This, Melzer argues, is the context that helps to elucidate an astonishingly hasty choice by the police to inform the general public prosecutor of a rape investigation towards Assange minutes after a lady referred to solely as “S” first spoke to a police officer in a central Stockholm station.
In actual fact, S and one other girl, “A”, had not supposed to make any allegation towards Assange. After studying he had had intercourse with them in fast succession, they needed him to take an HIV take a look at. They thought approaching the police would drive his hand (p115). The police had different concepts.
The irregularities within the dealing with of the case are so quite a few, Melzer spends one of the best a part of 100 pages documenting them. The ladies’s testimonies weren’t recorded, transcribed verbatim, or witnessed by a second officer. They have been summarised.
The identical, deeply flawed process – one which made it unattainable to inform whether or not main questions influenced their testimony or whether or not important info was excluded – was employed throughout the interviews of witnesses pleasant to the ladies. Assange’s interview and people of his allies, in contrast, have been recorded and transcribed verbatim (p132).
Learn Extra »
The rationale for the ladies making their statements – the need to get an HIV take a look at from Assange – was not talked about within the police summaries.
Within the case of S, her testimony was later altered with out her data, in extremely doubtful circumstances which have by no means been defined (p139-41). The unique textual content is redacted so it’s unattainable to know what was altered.
Stranger nonetheless, a felony report of rape was logged towards Assange on the police laptop system at 4.11pm, 11 minutes after the preliminary assembly with S and 10 minutes earlier than a senior officer had begun interviewing S – and two and half hours earlier than that interview would end (p119-20).
In one other signal of the astounding velocity of developments, Sweden’s public prosecutor had obtained two felony studies towards Assange from the police by 5pm, lengthy earlier than the interview with S had been accomplished. The prosecutor then instantly issued an arrest warrant towards Assange earlier than the police abstract was written and with out taking into consideration that S didn’t conform to signal it (p121).
Nearly instantly, the data was leaked to the Swedish media, and inside an hour of receiving the felony studies the general public prosecutor had damaged protocol by confirming the small print to the Swedish media (p126).
Secret amendments
The fixed lack of transparency within the remedy of Assange by Swedish, British, US, and Ecuadorian authorities turns into a theme in Melzer’s ebook. Proof is just not made accessible below freedom of data legal guidelines, or, whether it is, it’s closely redacted or just some elements are launched – presumably these that don’t threat undermining the official narrative.
For 4 years, Assange’s attorneys have been denied any copies of the textual content messages the 2 Swedish ladies despatched – on the grounds they have been “categorized”. The messages have been additionally denied to the Swedish courts, even after they have been deliberating on whether or not to increase an arrest warrant for Assange (p124).
It was not till 9 years later these messages have been made public, although Melzer notes that the index numbers present many proceed to be withheld. Most notably, 12 messages despatched by S from the police station – when she is thought to have been sad on the police narrative being imposed on her – are lacking. They might probably have been essential to Assange’s defence (p125).
The textual content messages from the ladies which have been launched counsel strongly that they felt they have been being railroaded right into a model of occasions that they had not agreed to
Equally, a lot of the later correspondence between British and Swedish prosecutors that stored Assange trapped within the Ecuadorian embassy for years was destroyed – even whereas the Swedish preliminary investigation was supposedly nonetheless being pursued (p106).
The textual content messages from the ladies which have been launched, nevertheless, counsel strongly that they felt they have been being railroaded right into a model of occasions that they had not agreed to.
Slowly they relented, the texts counsel, because the juggernaut of the official narrative bore down on them, with the implied risk that in the event that they disputed it they risked prosecution themselves for offering false testimony (p130).
Moments after S entered the police station, she texted a buddy to say that “the police officer seems to love the thought of getting him [Assange]” (p117).
In a later message, she writes that it was “the police who made up the costs” (p129). And when the state assigns her a high-profile lawyer, she observes solely that she hopes he’ll get her “out of this shit” (p136).
In an additional textual content, she says: “I didn’t wish to be a part of it [the case against Assange], however now I’ve no alternative” (p137).
It was on the idea of the key amendments made to S’s testimony by the police that the primary prosecutor’s choice to drop the case towards Assange was overturned, and the investigation reopened (p141). As Melzer notes, the faint hope of launching a prosecution of Assange primarily rested on one phrase: whether or not S was “asleep”, “half-asleep” or “sleepy” after they had intercourse.
Melzer write that “so long as the Swedish authorities are allowed to cover behind the handy veil of secrecy, the reality about this doubtful episode could by no means come to mild” (p141).
‘No peculiar extradition’
These and plenty of, many different obvious irregularities within the Swedish preliminary investigation documented by Melzer are very important to decoding what comes subsequent. Or as Melzer concludes “the authorities weren’t pursuing justice on this case however a totally totally different, purely political agenda” (p147).
With the investigation hanging over his head, Assange struggled to construct on the momentum of the Iraq and Afghanistan logs revealing systematic conflict crimes dedicated by the US and UK.
“The concerned governments had efficiently snatched the highlight directed at them by WikiLeaks, turned it round, and pointed it at Assange,” Melzer observes.
They’ve been doing the identical ever since.
Assange was given permission to depart Sweden after the brand new prosecutor assigned to the case repeatedly declined to interview him a second time (p153-4).
However as quickly as Assange departed for London, an Interpol Crimson Discover was issued, one other extraordinary improvement given its use for critical worldwide crimes, setting the stage for the fugitive-from-justice narrative (p167).
Learn Extra »
A European Arrest Warrant was accredited by the UK courts quickly afterwards – however, once more exceptionally, after the judges had reversed the specific will of the British parliament that such warrants might solely be issued by a “judicial authority” within the nation searching for extradition, not the police or a prosecutor (p177-9).
A legislation was handed shortly after the ruling to shut that loophole and ensure nobody else would endure Assange’s destiny (p180).
Because the noose tightened across the neck not solely of Assange however WikiLeaks too – the group was denied server capability, its financial institution accounts have been blocked, credit score firms refused to course of funds (p172) – Assange had little alternative however to simply accept that the US was the shifting drive behind the scenes.
He hurried into the Ecuadorean embassy after being provided political asylum. A brand new chapter of the identical story was about to start.
British officers within the Crown Prosecution Service, because the few surviving emails present, have been those bullying their Swedish counterparts to maintain going with the case as Swedish curiosity flagged. The UK, supposedly a disinterested occasion, insisted behind the scenes that Assange have to be required to depart the embassy – and his asylum – to be interviewed in Stockholm (p174).
A CPS lawyer instructed Swedish counterparts “don’t you dare get chilly toes!” (p186).
As Christmas neared, the Swedish prosecutor joked about Assange being a gift, “I’m OK with out… In actual fact, it could be a shock to get that one!” (p187).
When she mentioned with the CPS Swedish doubts about persevering with the case, she apologised for “ruining your weekend” (p188).
In yet one more e-mail, a British CPS lawyer suggested “please don’t suppose that the case is being handled as simply one other extradition request” (p176).
Embassy spying operation
That will clarify why William Hague, the UK’s overseas secretary on the time, risked a serious diplomatic incident by threatening to violate Ecuadorean sovereignty and invade the embassy to arrest Assange (p184).
And why Sir Alan Duncan, a UK authorities minister, made common entries in his diary, later printed as a ebook, on how he was working aggressively behind the scenes to get Assange out of the embassy (p200, 209, 273, 313).
And why the British police have been able to spend £16 million of public cash besieging the embassy for seven years to implement an extradition Swedish prosecutors appeared fully tired of advancing (p188).
Ecuador, the one nation prepared to supply Assange sanctuary, quickly modified course as soon as its widespread left-wing president Rafael Correa stepped down in 2017. His successor, Lenin Moreno, got here below huge diplomatic stress from Washington and was provided important monetary incentives to surrender Assange (p212).
Learn Extra »
At first, this seems to have mainly concerned depriving Assange of just about all contact with the surface world, together with entry to the web, and phone and launching a media demonisation marketing campaign that portrayed him as abusing his cat and smearing faeces on the wall (p207-9).
On the identical time, the CIA labored with the embassy’s safety agency to launch a classy, covert spying operation of Assange and all his guests, together with his docs and attorneys (p200). We now know that the CIA was additionally contemplating plans to kidnap or assassinate Assange (p218).
Lastly in April 2019, having stripped Assange of his citizenship and asylum – in flagrant violation of worldwide and Ecuadorean legislation – Quito let the British police seize him (p213).
He was dragged into the daylight, his first public look in lots of months, trying unshaven and unkempt – a “demented trying gnome”, as a long-time Guardian columnist referred to as him.
In actual fact, Assange’s picture had been fastidiously managed to alienate the watching world. Embassy workers had confiscated his shaving and grooming equipment months earlier.
In the meantime, Assange’s private belongings, his laptop, and paperwork have been seized and transferred to not his household or attorneys, and even the British authorities, however to the US – the true creator of this drama (p214).
That transfer, and the truth that the CIA had spied on Assange’s conversations together with his attorneys contained in the embassy, ought to have sufficiently polluted any authorized proceedings towards Assange to require that he stroll free.
However the rule of legislation, as Melzer retains noting, has by no means appeared to matter in Assange’s case.
Fairly the reverse, the truth is. Assange was instantly taken to a London police station the place a brand new arrest warrant was issued for his extradition to the US.
The identical afternoon Assange appeared earlier than a courtroom for half an hour, with no time to arrange a defence, to be tried for a seven-year-old bail violation over his being granted asylum within the embassy (p48).
He was sentenced to 50 weeks – nearly the utmost doable – in Belmarsh high-security jail, the place he has been ever since.
Apparently, it occurred neither to the British courts nor to the media that the rationale Assange had violated his bail circumstances was exactly to keep away from the political extradition to the US he was confronted with as quickly as he was pressured out of the embassy.
‘Residing in a tyranny’
A lot of the remainder of Melzer’s ebook paperwork in disturbing element what he calls the present “Anglo-American present trial”: the limitless procedural abuses Assange has confronted over the previous three years as British judges have failed to stop what Melzer argues needs to be seen as not only one however a raft of obvious miscarriages of justice.
Not least, extradition on political grounds is expressly forbidden below Britain’s extradition treaty with the US (p178-80, 294-5). However but once more the legislation counts for nothing when it applies to Assange.
The choice on extradition now rests with Patel, the hawkish residence secretary who beforehand needed to resign from the federal government for secret dealings with a overseas energy, Israel, and is behind the federal government’s present draconian plan to ship asylum seekers to Rwanda, nearly definitely in violation of the UN Refugee Conference.
Melzer has repeatedly complained to the UK, the US, Sweden, and Ecuador in regards to the many procedural abuses in Assange’s case, in addition to the psychological torture he has been subjected to. All 4, the UN rapporteur factors out, have both stonewalled or handled his inquiries with open contempt (p235-44).
‘As soon as telling the reality has change into a criminal offense, we’ll all be residing in a tyranny’
– Nils Melzer
Assange can by no means hope to get a good trial within the US, Melzer notes. First, politicians from throughout the spectrum, together with the final two US presidents, have publicly damned Assange as a spy, terrorist, or traitor and plenty of have steered he deserves demise (p216-7).
And second, as a result of he could be tried within the infamous “espionage courtroom” in Alexandria, Virginia, situated within the coronary heart of the US intelligence and safety institution, with out public or press entry (p220-2).
No jury there could be sympathetic to what Assange did in exposing their group’s crimes. Or as Melzer observes: “Assange would get a secret state-security trial similar to these carried out in dictatorships” (p223).
And as soon as within the US, Assange would probably by no means be seen once more, below “particular administrative measures” (SAMs) that may hold him in whole isolation 24-hours-a-day (p227-9). Melzer calls SAMs “one other fraudulent label for torture”.
Melzer’s ebook is not only a documentation of the persecution of 1 dissident. He notes that Washington has been meting out abuses on all dissidents, together with most famously the whistleblowers Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden.
Assange’s case is so necessary, Melzer argues, as a result of it marks the second when western states not solely goal these working inside the system who blow the whistle that breaks their confidentiality contracts, however these exterior it too – these like journalists and publishers whose very position in a democratic society is to behave as a watchdog on energy.
If we do nothing, Melzer’s ebook warns, we’ll get up to search out the world reworked. Or as he concludes: “As soon as telling the reality has change into a criminal offense, we’ll all be residing in a tyranny” (p331).
The Trial of Julian Assange by Nils Melzer is printed by Penguin Random Home
The views expressed on this article belong to the creator and don’t essentially replicate the editorial coverage of Center East Eye.
[ad_2]
Source link