A victory for free speech

‘We should at least examine and remember those who spoke in favour of free speech in this case, and those who, despite bearing a great arsenal of resources, remained silent.’

The ruling that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange cannot be extradited to the United States acts as a brief moment of relief in what has felt like an unceasing avalanche of blows against British liberty over the past twelve months.

The Daily Telegraph reports that ‘Mr. Assange’s eleven-year battle against extradition finally appeared to draw to a close on Monday after District Judge Vanessa Baraitser ruled the 49-year-old should not be sent to the U.S. by ‘reason of mental health’.’

It does not matter who Julian Assange is personally, or whether or not you like him. The implications of this ruling on free speech go beyond such personality politics.

Mr. Assange’s fiancée, Stella Morris, put it well in an article for the latest issue of the Mail on Sunday:

‘[If the court had ruled that Julian could be extradited to the U.S. where he would face trial for his publications, it would rewrite the rules of what it is permissible to publish here. Overnight, it would chill free and open debate about abuses by our own government and by many foreign ones, too.

‘In effect, foreign countries could simply issue an extradition request saying that UK journalists, or Facebook users for that matter, have violated their censorship laws.’

With the imposition of a new national lockdown (which really began last week) and the recent cancellation of TalkRadio’s YouTube channel, which must be where it gets many of its listeners, (though the channel has now been reinstated, after a large outcry) we have no time – nor, indeed, a substantial enough cause – for celebration. But we should at least examine and remember those who spoke in favour of free speech in this case, and those who, despite bearing a great arsenal of resources, remained silent.