(London, U.K.) The Supreme Court rejected an application to hear an appeal from imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange on Monday.
Assange, 50, who will have soon spent three years incarcerated at H.M.P. Belmarsh in southeast London, made the application via his lawyers after diplomatic assurances provided by the United States were sufficient to overturn an earlier decision not to extradite him to the country.
District Judge Vanessa Baraitser had ruled that extradition should be barred by way of Assange’s mental health in January 2021 — namely due to the substantial risk of suicide caused by his recurrent depressive disorder alongside his diagnosis of Asperger’s — but the U.S. was quick to appeal, sending a series of assurances to Britain on February 5 that year.
The assurances, which have been criticised for being unreliable and conditional in nature, insist Assange would not be held in Special Administrative Measures — a strict communication regime designed to cut off from the outside world — or that he would be held at the maximum-security penitentiary at the ADX in Florence, Colorado, if convicted and sentenced to a custodial term.
Upon hearing the U.S. appeal, the British High Court accepted the assurances and ruled in favour of extradition the following December. Lawyers for Assange then sought to stop the process of sending him to America by appealing to the Supreme Court.
In a one-page ruling released on March 14, justices Lord Robert Reed, Lord Patrick Hodge and Lord Michael Briggs said: “The court ordered that permission to appeal be refused because the application does not raise an arguable point of law.”
Lawyers for Assange, Birnberg Peirce Solicitors, issued a statement in which they expressed disappointment in the Supreme Court’s decision.
“We regret that the opportunity has not been taken to consider the troubling circumstances in which Requesting States can provide caveated guarantees after the conclusion of a full evidential hearing,” the statement read.
“In Mr Assange’s case, the court had found that there was a real risk of prohibited treatment in the event of his onward extradition.”
The matter will now be remitted to Westminister Magistrates’ Court who will refer the case to Home Secretary Priti Patel. As outlined by Assange’s lawyers, she can then order or refuse extradition depending on a number of statutory bases. Assange’s lawyers are also entitled to make a submission within four weeks, before any decision is made.
Even if Patel then decides to extradite, Assange and his lawyers would also have another crack at an appeal. It was established at an earlier proceeding that Assange was entitled to challenge the points of law which went against him in the original ruling of January last year.
The case continues.