Assange sought asylum seven years ago to avoid extradition to Sweden over a sexual assault case that was later dropped.

Although Ecuador President Lenin Moreno said that the asylum was withdrawn after “repeated violations of international conventions,” Wikileaks tweeted that Ecuador acted illegally in terminating Assange’s political asylum “in violation of international law”. The organisation’s official Twitter handle had, on April 5, tweeted that Assange would be “expelled within ‘hours or days’ using the #INAPapers offshore scandal as a pretext,” citing a high-level source within the Ecuadorian state, and saying that Ecuador already had an agreement with the United Kingdom for his arrest. 

 The United States’ Department of Justice confirmed that Assange had been indicted over a conspiracy with former US intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to commit computer intrusion in 2010.

US prosecutors have alleged that Assange “engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the US Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password” on classified Department of Defence (DoD) computer systems, CNN reported. 

Sweden’s Prosecution Authority also said in a statement that it may re-open its sexual assault probe into Assange.

Assange is an Australian national, and set up Wikileaks in 2006 with the aim of “obtaining and publishing” confidential documents and images. In 2010, it released footages of US soldiers killing civilians from a helicopter in Iraq.

Many tweeted in support of Assange:

The Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald called the move “criminalization of journalism”

Assange’s attorney in the US, Barry Pollack, said: 

Chelsea Manning a former soldier in the US Army, was arrested in 2010, and convicted in 2013 for releasing nearly 750,000 classified, and unclassified but sensitive, military and diplomatic documents to Wikileaks. Her sentence was commuted in January 2017, but in March 2019, she was once again imprisoned for refusing to testify before a grand jury investigating Wikileaks.

The post Wikileaks co-founder Julian Assange arrested after Ecuador withdraws asylum appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy : factordaily

Wikileaks new Cables about CIA and Aadhaar Data Leakage
On 24th August wikileaks published new cables regarding ExpressLane Project by CIA through its liaison companies. Indians are the one of major victim of this ExpressLane Project because CrossMarch is one of the initial Digital Equipment Provider (DEP) in Aadhaar Project. WikiLeaks Cables says that “ These documents show one of the cyber operations the CIA conducts against liaison services — which includes among many others the National Security Agency (NSA), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).The OTS (Office of Technical Services), a branch within the CIA, has a biometric collection system that is provided to liaison services around the world — with the expectation for sharing of the biometric takes collected on the systems. But this ‘voluntary sharing’ obviously does not work or is considered insufficient by the CIA, because ExpressLane is a covert information collection tool that is used by the CIA to secretly exfiltrate data collections from such systems provided to liaison services. ExpressLane is installed and run with the cover of upgrading the biometric software by OTS agents that visit the liaison sites. Liaison officers overseeing this procedure will remain unsuspicious, as the data exfiltration disguises behind a Windows installation splash screen. The core components of the OTS system are based on products from Cross Match, a US company specializing in biometric software for law enforcement and the Intelligence Community. The company hit the headlines in 2011 when it was reported that the US military used a Cross Match product to identify Osama bin Laden during the assassination operation in Pakistan”. Cross Match was one of the first multi-national Bio-metric Service Provider had secured the approval of UIDAI for the collection of Bio-Metric data of the citizens in the country in Aadhaar Scheme. On 2011 October Company had bagged the said approval and on September 2010 company received Provisional Certificate for use of UID program. GGI News Reports thatIn 2012, Francisco Partners acquired Cross Match Technologies Inc. Infamous Israeli Cyber Weapon group Called NSO is the one of portfolio company of Francisco Partners. This Multi-Giant links will helps to determine the depth of Multi Billion Dollar Industry of Bio-Metric. GGI News adds as per the new analysis by the research and market India’sBio-metric Market will hit by $2 Billion in 2018. Cross Match’s Indian partner is a Noida based Smart id. Since 2014 Smart id had carried out Bio-Metric Data Collection of 1.2 Million Peoples of the country. As per Wiki Cables these 1.2 Million Bio-Metric Data is now with CIA.

USA Patriot Act and Privacy of Individuals Around the Globe
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks prompted congressional action on many fronts, including passage of the United and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT)Act. After the enactment of said act by Bush Administration, people outraged around the world and made protests against the unilateral movement by US Government. Many of provisions in the Patriot Act will curtail the privacy of individuals as well as American Citizens and others around the world. According to Patriot Act the Organizations within the states are bound to share their Cloud,Centralized Data Servers and other tangible and intangible sophisticated documents with federal agencies like NSA,FBI etc. Title II of the Act, Enhanced Surveillance Procedures, includes provisions that affect monitoring of Internet activities. Section 210 expands the scope of subpoenas for records of electronic communications to include records commonly associated with Internet usage, such as session times and duration. Section 211 clarifies that cable companies offering Internet services are subject to 18 U.S.C. ch. 119 (Wire and Electronics Interception and Interception of Oral Communications), 18 U.S.C. ch. 121 (Stored Wire and Electronic Communications and Transactional Records Access), and 18 U.S.C. ch. 206 (Pen Registers and Trap and Trace Devices)in their provision of those services. Cable companies had sought, in particular, to clarify their obligationswith regard to release of personally identifiable information about subscribers and whether they were required to notify the subscriber that the information had been requested by a governmental entity as required under the 1992 Cable Act. Under this section, no notification is required, but disclosure specifically does not include a subscriber’s video programming choices. Peter Swire, who served as privacy counselor at the Office of Management and Budget during the Clinton Administration, worries that the Act does not include sufficient provisions to deal with potential abuses by law enforcement of the new authorities granted in the Act. Title II of the Patriot Act, “Enhanced Surveillance Procedures,” expanded the reach of FISA ( Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Court Orders to allow the FBI to obtain “an order requiring the production of any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents and other items) for an investigation to protect against international terrorism and clandestine intelligence activities.”

How did Indians reach in this Land Mark Judgement over Privacy and What is Next ?
In 2015 during Aadhaar petition J. Chelameswar’s 3 members bench struck on Kharak singh and M.P Sharma Case precedents,and they directed the question whether Right to Privacy is Fundamental Right or not to Constitution bench. CJI has the duty to constitute constitution bench but Honorable court sit idle. After 2 years gap again Aadhar petitions came before J Chalameswar’s bench and bench requested petitioners and Union of India to mention it before CJI seeking setting up of the Constitution Bench at the earliest, so as to decide the main matter referred to it in August 2015 . Then CJI constituted 5 members constitution bench in July. The first day of argument The Attorney General for India pointed that the existence of a fundamental right of privacy is in doubt in view of two decisions : the first M P Sharma v Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi was rendered by a Bench of eight judges and the second, in Kharak Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh was rendered by a Bench of six judges. Each of these decisions, in the submission of the Attorney General, contained observations that the Indian Constitution does not specifically protect the right to privacy. On July 18 CJI JS Khehar constituted nine members constitution bench to decide whether Right to Privacy is Fundamental Right or not. Now 9 bench over ruled precedent cases with upholding J Subba Rao’s minority Judgement in Kharak Singh and marked Right to Privacy as fundamental Right. Now this unanimous judgement by constitution bench will help in Aadhaar Matter (J.Puttaswamy (retired) & Ors v Union of Inida) which is going to be start on September 5 before J Chalemeswar’s bench. It is the duty of respondents ( Central and other respondents like UIDAI,TRAI etc) to prove Aadhar doesn’t invade privacy and for now Petitioners have edge in Aadhaar Case. The impact over Right to Privacy Judgement don’t settle within the contours of digital privacy in modern era and will percolate into other infamous Statutes which prevents Cow slaughter across the various states in the country and Sections like 377 in Indian Penal Code.

“Privacy, in its simplest sense, allows each human being to be left alone in a core which is inviolable. Yet the autonomy of the individual is conditioned by her relationships with the rest of society. Those relationships may and do often pose questions to autonomy and free choice. The overarching presence of state and non state entities regulates aspects of social existence which bear upon the freedom of the individual” these are the words of J DY Chandrachud from the recent Judgement on Privacy. Here court clearly affirms that Right to Privacy is an inalienable right of citizen under Indian Constitution. Through this land mark verdict by Supreme Court of India protected Individual Privacy is under Part III of the Constitution. This will allow the peoples to seek Constitutional Remedies through Article 32 and 226 respectively in Supreme Court and High Court. The revelation by Wiki Leaks is again unveiled the vulnerability of centralized Bio-Metric Data System and interest of Private players in the largest Bio-Metric project of the world. Privacy is an inevitable element for the bodily integration of individual and any act to derogate the right will be the catacomb of physical existence.
(Author is a Law Student in Government Law College, Thrissur , Kerala and member of Citizen Collective for Digital Rights and Privacy)

Reference :

1. Marcia S. Smith, Jeffrey W. Seifert, Glenn J. McLoughlin, and John Dimitri Moteff : Resources, Science, and Industry DivisionThe Internet and the USA PATRIOT Act: Potential Implications for Electronic Privacy, Security, Commerce, and Government
2. Swire, Peter. If Surveillance Expands, Safeguard Civil Liberties. Atlanta Journal-Constitution op-ed, October 21, 2001
3. https://www.mayerbrown.com/publications/the-usa-patriot-act-and-the-privacy-of-data-stored-in-the-cloud-01-18-2012/
4. https://wikileaks.org/vault7/#ExpressLane
5. www.livelaw.in
6. JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY (RETD.) AND ANR V UNION OF INDIA AND ORS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 494 OF 2012
7. http://gginews.in/cia-spies-access-aadhaar-database/

The post Big Brother Reading Your Aadhaar Data appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Aadhar Data is available to USA’s infamous CIA and therefore much more than privacy, India’s soveregnity stands compromised.

Today, August 24, WikiLeaks published secret documents from the ExpressLane project of the CIA. These documents reveal details of one of the cyber operations the CIA conducts against liaison services — which includes among many others the National Security Agency (NSA), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

According to Wikileaks, the OTS (Office of Technical Services), a branch within the CIA, has a biometric collection system that is provided to liaison services around the world — with the expectation for sharing of the biometric takes collected on the systems. But this ‘voluntary sharing’ obviously does not work or is considered insufficient by the CIA, because ExpressLane is a covert information collection tool that is used by the CIA to secretly exfiltrate data collections from such systems provided to liaison services.

ExpressLane is installed and run with the cover of upgrading the biometric software by OTS agents that visit the liaison sites. Liaison officers overseeing this procedure will remain unsuspicious, as the data exfiltration disguises behind a Windows installation splash screen.The core components of the OTS system are based on products from Cross Match, a US company specializing in biometric software for law enforcement and the Intelligence Community. The company hit the headlines in 2011 when it was reported that the US military used a Cross Match product to identify Osama bin Laden during the assassination operation in Pakistan.

So is the Indian government by insisting on Aadhar compromising India’s core sovereignity?

The core components of the OTS system are based on products from Cross Match, a US company specializing in biometric software for law enforcement and the Intelligence Community. The company hit the headlines in 2011 when it was reported that the US military used a Cross Match product to identify Osama bin Laden during the assassination operation in Pakistan.

Cross Match certified by UIDAI

Cross Match was one of the first suppliers of biometric devices certified by UIDAI for Aadhaar program. The company received the Certificate of Approval from the Indian Government in 2011. Cross Match received the Certificate of Approval for its Guardian fingerprint capture device and the I SCAN dual iris capture device on October 7, 2011. Both systems utilize Cross Match’s patented Auto Capture feature, which quickly captures high-quality images with minimal operator involvement.

The Certificate of Approval, was issued after completion of all tests required to demonstrate compliance with the quality requirements of UIDAI. The certification body consists of the Standardization, Testing and Quality Certification (STQC) Directorate for the Government of India’s Department of Information Technology (DIT) and the UIDAI. The tests performed by the STQC included the following criteria: Physical & Dimensional, Image Quality, Environmental (Durability/Climatic), Safety, EMI/EMC, Security, Functional, Performance, Interoperability, Ease of Use & Ergonomics.

Majority of the UIDAI certified enrollment agencies use Cross Match devices across India. Cross Match was also the first company to receive the Provisional Certificate for use in the UID program in September, 2010. Video featuring the Cross Match Guardian and I SCAN devices has been taken down from the official UIDAI website.

Francisco Partners

In 2012, Francisco Partners acquired Cross Match Technologies Inc. The company has more than 5,000 customers worldwide and over 250,000 products deployed in over 80 countries. Cross Match’s customers include the U.S. Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. State Department and various state and local governments; as well as numerous foreign governments and law enforcement agencies. It also provides biometric solutions to customers in transportation, critical infrastructure, financial services, education, and healthcare sectors.
One of Francisco Partners portfolio company is an Israeli cyber weapons dealer called NSO Group. The company’s Pegasus iOS malware was linked to attacks on iPhones of a prominent UAE activist and a Mexican journalist.

Researchers from the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab and mobile security firm Lookout raised questions about the ethics of NSO Group, a government spyware provider founded by an alum of Israel’s vaunted intelligence agencies. Francisco Partners bought its stake in the company for $120 million in 2014. Citizen Lab uncovered NSO’s Pegasus malware targeting iPhones of a Mexican journalist and a UAE activist. The same day, FORBES reported that Francisco Partners added Circles to its roster of investments, another Israeli-founded surveillance firm, which sold contentious gear to hack a part of global telecoms networks, known as SS7. That cost the private equity firm $130 million, a source close to the deal told FORBES.

Spying on Governments, Activists & Journalists

Francisco Partners also ran Turkey’s spy operations by selling its deep packet inspection product for surveillance. Deep packet inspection enables surveillance at the outset. Its very purpose is to open up “packets” of data flying across networks and inspect them to check if they should pass. DPI has made headlines for controversial use cases. China, for instance, likes to use DPI in its infamous censorship and surveillance systems. Sunnyvale, California-based Blue Coat Systems, in which Francisco Partners was a significant investor, saw its DPI technology censoring the internet in Syria in 2011, just as the civil war was erupting. Human rights activists looked on agog, but Blue Coat later said resellers were to blame and that it had not given permission for the technology to be shipped to the country. One reseller was later slapped with a maximum fine of $2.8 million by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS). (Francisco Partners also has stakes in Barracuda Networks and Dell Software, which both ship DPI products).

Aadhaar’s biometric pioneer

The foundation of the Aadhaar program is based on biometric and demographic data that is unique to each citizen. This data can only be collected by leveraging biometric devices and compatible software – the second and third stages of the Aadhaar value chain.

Cross Match’s Indian partner for the UID program is Smart Identity Devices Pvt. Ltd. (Smart ID). Smart Identity Devices, or Smart ID, has been the biometric pioneer and leader for the Aadhaar program. Smart ID provides biometric technology, smart card, and information and communication technology products and services for numerous sectors, such as financial services, logistics, government, and IT security. Launching commercial operations in 2008, Smart ID is based in Noida, India and is led by Sanjeev Mathur. The company’s devices are being used by enrollment agencies across India for the Aadhaar program.
 

According to a recent study by Research and Markets, India’s biometrics market is forecast to hit about $2 billion by 2018.

Smart ID’s products and services range from biometric products, to mobile application solutions, to services such as Aadhaar enrollment, training, project management, IT hosting, and business correspondent management. As of 2014, Smart ID was able to carry out enrollment activities across India in states such as, Jharkhand, Tamil Nadu, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, West Bangal, and Madhya Pradesh. Smart ID has already enrolled more than 1.2 million citizens into the Aadhaar program through its enrollment agencies. In July 2011, the UIDAI recognized Smart ID as being one of the three best enrollment agencies in Aadhaar for enrolling more than 25 million citizens in a very short time frame.
The price of a Smart ID Patrol ID fingerprint scanner was approximately $2300 in 2014. And these devices were installed across the country. It would be interesting to know how much did the Indian government pay this CIA front company for the exercise. Lets say UIDAI installed 10,000 such bugged CIA devices across the country for enrollment (which is a very conservative estimate), the staggering cost would be 1473554800 Rs.

How CIA agents can access Aadhaar database in Real-time

A number of the CIA’s electronic attack methods are designed for physical proximity. These attack methods are able to penetrate high security networks that are disconnected from the internet, such as police record database. In these cases, a CIA officer, agent or allied intelligence officer acting under instructions, physically infiltrates the targeted workplace. The attacker is provided with a USB containing malware developed for the CIA for this purpose, which is inserted into the targeted computer. The attacker then infects and exfiltrates data to removable media. For example, the CIA attack system Fine Dining, provides 24 decoy applications for CIA spies to use. To witnesses, the spy appears to be running a program showing videos (e.g VLC), presenting slides (Prezi), playing a computer game (Breakout2, 2048) or even running a fake virus scanner (Kaspersky, McAfee, Sophos). But while the decoy application is on the screen, the underlaying system is automatically infected and ransacked.

Fine Dining comes with a standardized questionnaire i.e menu that CIA case officers fill out. The questionnaire is used by the agency’s OSB (Operational Support Branch) to transform the requests of case officers into technical requirements for hacking attacks (typically “exfiltrating” information from computer systems) for specific operations. The questionnaire allows the OSB to identify how to adapt existing tools for the operation, and communicate this to CIA malware configuration staff. The OSB functions as the interface between CIA operational staff and the relevant technical support staff.

Among the list of possible targets of the collection are ‘Asset’, ‘Liason Asset’, ‘System Administrator’, ‘Foreign Information Operations’, ‘Foreign Intelligence Agencies’ and ‘Foreign Government Entities’. Notably absent is any reference to extremists or transnational criminals. The ‘Case Officer’ is also asked to specify the environment of the target like the type of computer, operating system used, Internet connectivity and installed anti-virus utilities (PSPs) as well as a list of file types to be exfiltrated like Office documents, audio, video, images or custom file types. The ‘menu’ also asks for information if recurring access to the target is possible and how long unobserved access to the computer can be maintained. This information is used by the CIA’s ‘JQJIMPROVISE’ software to configure a set of CIA malware suited to the specific needs of an operation.

Here is the official training manual that contains the detailed steps for carrying out the installation and configuration of Cross Match for the Aadhaar Enrolment Client. This manual also describes the process of importing master data after downloading it from the UIDAI Admin Portal.

It is remarkable that Aadhaar and Al-Qaeda mean the same thing, which is “foundation” – Manu Joseph pointed out this tweetable fact in his piece on Live Mint. What we might add is that it is also remarkable that both Aadhaar and Al Qaeda are illegitimate sons of the same mother!

By ararngement with GGI News

Related Stories:

1. India among top targets of spying by NSA
2. CIA Activities in India

The post How CIA Can Access India’s Biometric Aadhar Database: Indian Sovereignity Under Threat? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Gavin MacFadyen founded and ran the Centre for Investigative Journalism (CIJ), helping to train thousands of journalists in the pursuit of factual inquiry and in defence of the public interest. In tribute, we republish this MacFadyen piece, first published as “In-depth Charger” by the Frontline Club on June 27, 2006.

Serious, in-depth journalism may be unwell but it is still alive in Britain despite an almost complete lack of institutional support in television, and limited resources in print and radio. 

The definitions are many – but most would agree that investigative journalism is ‘normal’ journalism plus money and more importantly, plus time. Getting complicated, difficult or even dangerous stories through the commissioning process, struggling for sufficient time (and funds) for research, getting past the lawyers and on the air or in print requires intense and focused work.

It needs not just more resources than simply phone-bashing or recasting an NGO’s research, but time to think, to read, to make careful preparation, and to read some more. Care, precision, scepticism and accuracy are the guiding principles here. Tenacity and a healthy paranoia are also essentials. It’s from these qualities that major investigative stories are born. 

Tenacity is essential because doors are frequently slammed in your face, unforeseen factual obstacles appear, there are legal problems, threats, less-than-heroic editors a shortage of money and frightened witnesses. Paranoia is needed because most investigative journalists have seen the resources a multi-national corporation, the state or the powerful can bring to bear against a journalist, the editor and, very often, against the witness or whistleblower themselves. Editors and publishers rarely rise to the challenge, particularly if the object of the reporter’s attention has deep pockets.

Gavin MacFadyen (Centre for Investigative Journalism)

Investigative stories don’t, thankfully, require the inspiration of publishers or editors — most have little or none of that quality — but instead demand a reporter’s moral outrage at injustice, incompetence, brutality and misery. These qualities are the fuel of investigative engines around the world. Such interests and passions often make regular hacks uncomfortable. There is a longterm conflict between ‘campaigning’ journalism and ‘dispassionate’ and ‘objective’ reporting.

To the investigative journalist, ‘objective’ is all too frequently shorthand for a stenographic account of information provided by the authorities. Witness the thousands of uncritical embedded reports during the Iraq war. Many of the most accomplished investigative reporters, such as John Pilger and the late Paul Foot, disliked the term investigative. They argued that all good journalism ought to be investigative.

But for many journalists, work is simply a job. Their interest is in lapdog confidences and dining with the powerful. Those who passionately want to provide a voice for those without one, and who fight hypocrisy and exploitation are sadly rare. Between 1966 and the early 1990s British television produced some of the more extraordinary investigations in world television. It forced the resignation of senior government officials, exposed major pharmaceutical scandals, uncovered government corruption, corporate and financial crimes and brought images of slavery, child labour and torture into millions of home for the first time.

Panorama and World in Action were the target of frequent government attacks and outrage but attracted whistleblowers, disgruntled witnesses, public complainants and a number of deranged obsessives.

Filtering stories from these sources required sensitivity and time. Many of the journalists involved received their training in print and later in-house in television.  BBC, Granada and other ITV companies brought younger journalists through a system of research apprenticeships in an environment where there were serious intellectual resources. 

After navigating a decade of legal and political storms, editors and producers learnt the skills of investigative programme-making and, probably even most importantly, ways to defend those skills inside and outside the organisation. With audiences often over 12 million, programmes like World in Action and This Week, were not seen as unprofitable. In contrast to current affairs programmes today, World in Action had in-house research facilities, libraries, in some cases private planes. It also had the confidence that if the company, or their programme, was in difficulty, their journalism would not be abandoned.

Editors, cameramen, sound-recordists, electricians, researchers and travel offices all worked in-house.  A significant feature of in-house production was the implicit understanding that with high standards of evidence, some stories wouldn’t make it, despite months of work. The 20 percent of programmes that didn’t make it were compensated for by the successful programmes that did.
  
None of these conditions apply today – almost all have been destroyed during the last 20 years. The result is an absence of institutional production and protection of investigative stories. Budgets have been reduced. The responsibility for lengthy, high-quality research and production values has been off-loaded by large profitable organizations to individuals journalists, small production companies and to resources like NGOs.

In fact without the major research tools provided by the internet, which have shortened some research tasks from weeks to hours, there would probably be almost no investigative journalism on television and in the press. Without a long-term commitment from the BBC and the independent sector, the public will continue to be deprived of an in-depth understanding of current affairs, investigation of the abuse of the public trust by governments, scrutiny of corporations, corrupt practices, and the continuing failures to protect integrity in the public sector.

A number of organizations have sprung up across Europe and the US to try and reverse these trends.  In Britain, the non-profit Centre for Investigative Journalism has paired experienced investigative journalists with young reporters to encourage the raising of professional standards and the acquisition of skills. This has taken place in Britain and, perhaps more importantly, in countries where enquiry is often a dangerous, even deadly, pursuit. The Frontline Confidential series, co-produced with CIJ, has brought landmark investigations and leading investigative journalists into open discussion for the first time in London.

CIJ runs annual international summer schools – last year at Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism. On July 21-23 [2006] at City University in London, Anna Politkovskaya, an independent Russian journalist, and Chuck Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity in Washington will speak with 20 other trainers and technical experts.

Participants from 25 countries are expected and fees are subsidised by the Lorana Sullivan Foundation. The emphasis will be on the practical.  Details are available from www.investigativereporting.org.uk.
 

The next #CIJSummer Conference, training journalists, editors and researchers in investigative skills, will take place in London in July 2017.

(This article was first published on Opendemocracy.net.)

Also read: WikiLeaks Director Gavin MacFadyen dies at 76

The post Gavin MacFadyen (1940-2016): Why investigative Journalism matters appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image: Exaro

Renowned investigative journalist and director of WikiLeaks Gavin MacFadyen passed away, as per the tweet posted from the WikiLeaks official Twitter account on October 22. The cause of the death of the 76-year-old, who was known as the founder of Centre for Investigative Journalism (CIJ) and as a mentor of the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange remains ambiguous. However, CIJ on its website claims that the MacFadyen lost his life to lung cancer.

MacFadyen, who was also a filmmaker, has made more than 50 documentaries since the 1970s, focusing on wide array of subjects like industrial accidents, history of CIA, Watergate, neo-Nazi violence of the UK, nuclear proliferation etc. He founded CJI in 2003 to advance training in the field of investigative journalism for in-depth, sceptical and adversarial reporting. Over the next 13 years he helped train thousands of reporters from over 35 countries, many of which are places where free media is under attack.  He trained several students through CIJ.

In the recent years, his focussed on facilitating and protecting whistleblowing activities. He was closely linked to Assange, and was also responsible for Julian Assange Defence Committee, which raises funds to manage the legal expenses of Assange and other WikiLeaks staff.

He reportedly breathed his last in London on October 22. 
 

The post WikiLeaks Director Gavin MacFadyen dies at 76 appeared first on SabrangIndia.

UN body puts UK and Sweden on trial

The UN’s Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has decided that Julian Assange is being “arbitrarily held” by a concert of powers – so how might this curious situation play out?

The Working Group finds that Assange is not only entitled to his freedom of movement, but that he has a right to compensation.

This is of course a major PR victory for Assange. And whatever one thinks of the underlying story, the UN Report is a fascinating analysis of the susceptibility of national criminal processes (including on extradition) to international legal review.

So far, there have been no winners in this unique diplomatic quagmire, which has been stagnant since Assange claimed diplomatic asylum in 2012. Both Sweden and the UK have nothing to gain by becoming vicariously liable for his “arbitrary detention”, even if only in the court of international public opinion. Expect angry voices on both sides to raise the matter at this year’s UN General Assembly.

In a sense, the finding of the UN panel is binding mostly as a matter of international moral authority. Should the UK and Sweden choose to ignore the ruling, it could compromise their ability to boldly denounce other perhaps more repressive states in the future – particularly on the basis of any finding by the same UN panel. Both states have appeared over the years at the UN as champions of human rights and dissident cases, and neither has any urge to lose that cachet.

So what now? Despite the chagrin of the British and Swedish governments, there are a few ways forward.

Breaking the deadlock

Swedish officers could visit the Ecuadorian embassy to question Assange and take depositions. Maybe even an extraterritorial trial by an extraordinary Swedish court within the embassy can be arranged. Nothing is impossible in the world of diplomacy.

Assange’s lawyers have urged the charges to be dropped, although this is unlikely to happen before he is formally questioned. Either way, keeping him under what’s now deemed to be “arbitrary constructive detention” will only increase his political martyrdom.

The continuance of diplomatic asylum within the territory of a state hostile towards the accused is always very tricky. The course of events and end game scenarios tend towards the bizarre. US marines blasted hard rock music at deafening levels to flush Manuel Noriega out of the Vatican’s embassy in Panama. Peruvian politician Haya De la Torre was holed up in an embassy for at least three years while Colombia and Peru fought over the matter at the International Court of Justice.

And then there was Umaru Dikko. Dikko, a Nigerian politician who fled a huge corruption investigation at home in 1984, was kidnapped on the streets of London. He was then drugged and crated in what was described as “diplomatic baggage” for export back to Nigeria, accompanied by Israeli agents and doctors tasked with keeping him alive in the crate.It need not come to that. The panel’s conclusions could possibly inject some pragmatism into the whole affair. Assange could capitulate and walk out into the waiting hands of the UK law and be extradited, or perhaps an English court could refuse to allow his extradition based on the UN ruling. Both Assange and Ecuador could drop their claims for compensation for housing and inconveniences.

Now that the decision, however contentious, has been committed to paper and made public, all the concerned parties might finally have an impetus to find the necessary political will to reach some workable compromise to melt this excruciatingly slow-moving diplomatic glacier.

In the meantime, perhaps agents at British, Swedish and American airports should watch out for unusually large diplomatic baggage.

This article originally appeared on The Conversation

The post Julian Assange verdict: how this curious episode might be brought to an end appeared first on SabrangIndia.