By James Simons-
The Crown Prosecution Service have admitted destroying key emails relating to the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.
Assange remains up in Ecuador’s London embassy fighting extradition. Email exchanges between the CPS and its Swedish counterparts over the high-profile case were deleted after the lawyer at the UK end retired in 2014.
A tribunal hearing next week in London, to be attended by the eye of media.com, is set to hear the case for and against Assange, but will also have to address the revelation that the CPS destroyed potentially sensitive and revealing information in relation to the case. The CPS lawyer handling the case advised the Swedes in 2010 or 2011 not to visit London to interview Assange, despite the fact such an interview could have clarified matters.
CONTROVERSIAL
WikiLeaks has been involved several controversial leaks, including Hilary Clinton’s emails used in the U.S 2016 elections, the Iraq war logs, U.S state department cables, and others. Assange was also wanted by Sweden as part of an investigation into rape allegations, eventually dropped in May this year after he strenuously denied them. Assange is a man with many enemies in high places. His audacious mission to uncover highly secret and sensitive information wherever he can find them has lengthened the list of those who want him dead or alive. He has accusers in various sectors of operations from different nations. It is no secret that he is believed to have colluded with Russian authorities and propagandists in putting a spanner in the works of Hilary Clinton’s campaign for the U.S presidential elections, and effectively securing the election of Donald Trump- whose potential election was dreaded by most sitting governments.
The US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, said this year Assange was a priority for the justice department and U.S federal prosecutors want him charged over the leaks. The revelation that crucial emails relating to his case was destroyed by the CPS has fuelled the suspicions of skeptics that something untoward has gone on. The CPS say it is simply standard procedure that after a period of time lapses, they many times destroy information relating to many cases. Not everybody will believe that, bot when we are talking of a high profile case like that of the controversial Wikileaks founder and those who have levied serious charges against him.
The data destruction by the CPS was disclosed in a freedom of information (FOI) case pursued by active Italian journalist Stefania Maurizi. Maurizi, a reporter on La Repubblica, has covered WikiLeaks since 2009, and been pressing both the CPS and its Swedish counterpart for information relating to Assange and extradition. The persistent journalist is taking her case against the CPS to an information tribunal on Monday and Tuesday. “It is incredible to me these records about an ongoing and high-profile case have been destroyed. I think they have something to hide,” Maurizi said. She wants to establish how much influence the UK had in the decision of the Swedish authorities at the time not to travel to London to interview Assange. She is also looking for evidence of US involvement in extradition moves. Two years ago, the ambitious and determined Italian journalist unearthed through an FOI request to the Swedish prosecutors, an email from a lawyer in the CPS extradition unit on 25 January 2011 saying: “My earlier advice remains, that in my view it would not be prudent for the Swedish authorities to try to interview the defendant in the UK.” The details of the information given to Maurizi from the CPS under an FOI request was incomplete and redacted, but a fuller version was released to Swedish prosecutors when requested under an FOI request. Assange refused to travel to Sweden at the time, fearing it could pave the way for his extradition to the US. His lawyers offered a compromise in which Swedish investigators could interview him in person in London or by a video link, but the Swedish authorities did not take up the offer.
There is only one reason they rejected the offer, and that is that it did not suit the overall essence of their goals. DOUBT A legal manager at the CPS, Mohammed Cheema, who has been dealing with the FOI requests, said, in a lengthy witness statement in August this year, that the Assange case file comprises mainly 55 lever-arch files, one A4 file and a selection of other paper files. He then expressed doubt that the CPS held further significant email correspondence. Eleven days before the hearing, Cheema sent a further statement saying a search of electronic records found data associated with the lawyer who had been in touch with the Swedish prosecutors “was deleted when he retired and cannot be recovered”. He retired in March 2014. There is a world of difference between the initial expression of doubt by the CPS legal manager, and the eventual admission that data associated with the lawyer was deleted. It smells of a rat! Doughty Street chambers barrister, Jennifer Robinson, and Estelle Dehon, who specialises in freedom of information, will be representing Maurizi at the tribunal.
Robinson said: “The missing information raises concerns about the Crown Prosecution Service’s data retention policy and what internal mechanisms are in place to review their conduct of this case in light of the fact the UK has been found to have breached its international obligations.” Robinson said: “The CPS has disclosed some material which is very limited. We know there is more.” She added: “Serious questions must be asked about the role of the CPS. Had the Swedes interviewed Assange back in 2010 one wonders whether this case would have continued for such a long time.” The Swedes had interviewed many other people in the UK in relation to other cases, Robinson said. “We had been offering the Swedish prosecutors Assange’s testimony since October 2010. We didn’t know at the time that the CPS was advising them not to take up the offer”. The tribunal case next week shall be more revealing, and press interest will surely analyse all that emerges thoroughly and fully. We will definitely play our own part in this well.