Request number 1 : request for the release of political prisoner Julian Paul Assange

Paris, the 5th of November 2019

The Chief Magistrate’s Office

The Right honourable Lady Emma Arbuthnot

181 Marylebone Road

London

NW1 5BR

DX 120551, Marylebone 9 

Request number 1

Prisoner of opinion : Julian Paul Assange (03/07/1971)

Prison : Belmarsh

Prisoner Number: A 93 79 AY

Subject: Request for information on mandate

representation in the case EAW 131226-10

European Arrest Warrant File No.

AM 131226-10 :

File No. RCJ CO/1925/2011

Request number 1 : request for the release of political prisoner Julian Paul Assange

Dear Lady Chief,

By the request, we, Association WikiJustice Julian Assange, law 1901, hereby call for the immediate release of the political prisoner Julian Paul Assange.

Our association, which is a legal entity, is the guarantor for him. We will accompany him in his legal proceedings and undertake to ensure that he attends the hearings concerning his extradition to United State of America.

If necessary, we will ask that countries other than France, where Mr Julian Paul Assange may reside after release, serve as arbitrators in this extradition procedure. In order for the rules of democracy and for plurality of views to be respected, these countries will have to have interests that diverge from those of the United States of America and England.

Possible Countries: Iran, Russia, Ghana, Venezuela, Uzbekistan, Azerbaidjan, for example.

Respect for freedom of information and expression is everybody's liability, not just English people.

The release of a journalist, innocent of any crime, of a political prisoner illegally imprisoned and tortured, is the responsibility of all countries and the UN Security Council, not only England's.

The guarantees proposed by the association WikiJustice Julian Assange to the political prisoner Julian Paul Assange and to the English state in the context of this release proceduring

We will accompany Mr. Julian Paul Assange throughout his legal proceedings. We will ensure that he has access to his defence and that the procedure concerning him strictly complies with the rules of international law and texts relating to human rights and the integrity of the person.

Mr Julian Paul Assange, now, has an address in France :

Julian Paul Assange

56550 LOCOAL MENDON

We are waiting for his lawyers to give us his passport so that we can make do obten him a temporary residence permit in France until the end's procedure.

We will ensure the protection of Mr. Julian Paul Assange until his personal, legal and patrimonial situation is resolved.

We will ensure the safety of Mr. Julian Paul Assange until his state of health, both physical and psychological, allows him to manage his affairs alone.

Before lifting all measures taken to protect Mr. Julian Paul Assange, we will have ensured, by proof of the investigation, that he is not subject to any pressure or threat. We will ensure that Mr. Julian Paul Assange is not under the control of the Santiniketan sect or any other sect, that he is free of his movements, his actions, his choices, and is not subject to an abuse of weakness.

Before lifting any protective measures for Mr Julian Paul Assange, we will ensure that he has overcome all the traumas due to the torture to which he was subjected.

WikiJustice Julian Assange undertakes to guaranty the safety and health of Mr Julian Paul Assange. She undertakes to provide him with regular medical and psychological follow-up, a stable place of residence, to return to a normal life's free man, to work if he so wishes.

WikiJustice Julian Assange undertakes to defend Mr Julian Paul Assange and to appear, with him, at all extradition hearings.

The reasons why the political prisoner Julian Paul Assange must be immediately released

1. Monsieur Julian Paul Assange has never been convicted of any crime

Mr. Julian Paul Assange has not committed any crime. He is a national of Ecuador and Australia. He’snt an English citizen or an américan citizen. There are no charges against him.

When a person is incarcerated without cause, he or she is unlawfully incarcerated.

2. In the extradition proceedings to the United States Mr Julian Assange benefits from the presumption of innocence

Mr Julian Paul Assange is the subject of extradition proceedings to the United States of America but as he is not convicted for anything else, he is presumed innocent. As Julian Paul Assange is innocent of any crime, the English judicial system denies him the presumption of innocence and the right to defend himself. (Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016)

Under the law on the presumption of innocence, Mr Julian Paul Assange is unlawfully imprisoned.

"Member States shall ensure that any doubt as to the question of guilt is to benefit the suspect or accused person, including where the court assesses whether the person concerned should be acquitted." (Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 - Art.6-2)

3. Julian Paul Assange is a political prisoner. (Council of Europe - Doc 13011. See démonstration in the Situation report 1)

England inprison Mr Julian Paul Assange for information and opinion offences, in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (See Situation Report 1). Mr Julian Paul Assange is imprisoned for having done his job as a journalist . He has expose war crimes, state wrongdoing, paedophile criminal networks.

"Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises." (European Convention of Human Right. Art.10)

In countries that have ratified the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is illegal to imprison an individual for opinion offense. For this reason alone, Mr Julian Paul Assange should have been freed a long time ago.

As a result, as Mr Julian Paul Assange is a political prisoner, he cannot be extradited. (European Convention on extradition. Art.3 - Political offenses - See demonstration in the Situation report 1)

European Convention on Extradition. Article 3 - Political offences

1 Extradition shall not be granted if the offence in respect of which it is requested is regarded by the requested Party as a political offence or as an offence connected with a political offence.

2 The same rule shall apply if the requested Party has substantial grounds for believing that a request for extradition for an ordinary criminal offence has been made for the purpose of prosecuting or punishing a person on account of his race, religion, nationality or political opinion, or that that person's position may be prejudiced for any of these reasons.

The requesting party United States of America, is expect to prove that it is not seeking extradition for political reasons and that they don't violate the First Amendment (See Situation report 1).

England must ensure that the United States of America proves the guilt of Mr Julian Paul Assange, that they are not seeking extradition for political reasons and that his presumption of innocence are preseved.

"Member States shall ensure that the burden of proof for establishing the guilt of suspects and accused persons is on the prosecution." (Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 - Art.6-1)

England is expected to ensure that Mr Julian Assange is present at all hearings and can organise his defence as he sees fit. England is expected to preserve his presumption of innocence.

"Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that, for as long as a suspect or an accused person has not been proved guilty according to law, public statements made by public authorities, and judicial decisions, other than those on guilt, do not refer to that person as being guilty. (Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 - Art. 4-1)

"Member States shall ensure that suspects and accused persons have the right to be present at their trial." (Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 - Art. 8-1)

"Member States shall ensure that, where suspects or accused persons were not present at their trial and the conditions laid down in Article 8(2) were not met, they have the right to a new trial, or to another legal remedy, which allows a fresh determination of the merits of the case, including examination of new evidence, and which may lead to the original decision being reversed. In that regard, Member States shall ensure that those suspects and accused persons have the right to be present, to participate effectively, in accordance with procedures under national law, and to exercise the rights of the defence." (Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 - Art. 9)

"Without prejudice to national rules and systems on the admissibility of evidence, Member States shall ensure that, in the assessment of statements made by suspects or accused persons or of evidence obtained in breach of the right to remain silent or the right not to incriminate oneself, the rights of the defence and the fairness of the proceedings are respected." (Directive (EU) 2016/343 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 - Remedies)

4. By imprisoning Julian Paul Assange for more than ten years, the United Kingdom has violated the rule of proportionality and the fundamental rights of Julian Paul Assange

Wikijustice Julian Paul Assange and his Swedish team are also able to prove that the legal proceedings brought against Mr Julian Paul Assange in 2010 by Sweden were unfounded. The Swedish procedure is marred by procedural defects at all levels of its process. 

Right after the plaintifs depositions, the prosecutor Eva Finné opened the first preliminary inquiry. Based on the elements she had in hand, she closed the inquiry, which means that Mr Julian Paul Assange faced no charges. A second preliminary inquiry was then opened through the initative of Mrs Marianne Ny prosecutor, although no new element was brought to the file concerning the allegations against Mr Julian Paul Assange.

Mrs Mariannne Ny filed a European arrest warrant based on "rape, unlawful coersion, sexual molestation" charges. These charges do not exist by definition due to the preliminary status of the inquiry. The arrest warrant was thencontinued until year 2016 while the second preliminary investigation was closed. Henceforth, since 2016, there is no more arrest warrant against Mr. Julian Paul Assange. (See also Situation Report 1).

Prosecutor Marianne NY has seriously damaged Mr Julian Paul Assange's reputation. She denied him the presumption of innocence and caused damage to his health and fundamental rights.

Sweden should publicly apologise to Mr Julian Paul Assange, rehabilitate his reputation and pay him compensation in damages.

Mr Julian Paul Assange was illegally deprived of his liberty for more than ten years in violation of the proportionality law.

"No one shall be held guilty of any criminal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a criminal offence under national law or international law at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than that which was applicable at the time the criminal offence was committed. If, subsequent to the commission of a criminal offence, the law provides for a lighter penalty, that shall be applicable.

The severity of penalties must not be disproportionate to the criminal offence."

(EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Principe of legality y proportionality of criminal ofences and penalties. Art. 1 et 3)

Mr. Julian Paul Assange was not convicted of any crime.

By incarcerating him in Wandsworth Prison, then in the offices of the diplomatic mission of Colombia-Ecuador, and finally in Belmarsh Prison, the United Kingdom violated the presumption of innocence and the principle of proportionality.

Mr Julian Paul Assange should therefore be immediately released and compensated by the countries that have violated his fundamental rights.

5. Since 2016, Mr Julian Paul Assange has benefited from a UN ruling that requires him to be released, compensated and taken to safety.

Mr Julian Paul Assange benefits from a 2016 UN Ruling (54-2015. See Report Situation 1). According to this ruling, by 2016, he should have been released, compensated and taken to safety.

England owes compensation to Mr Julian Paul Assange for failing to comply with this decision. The UN is prescriber in the field of Human Rights.

6. Since 2012, Mr Julian Paul Assange enjoys political asylum in Ecuador and has Ecuadorian nationality.

Mr Julian Paul Assange enjoys political asylum in Ecuador. He is therefore protected by the Geneva Conventions. He also has Ecuadorian nationality. What has been validated by law can only be invalidated by law. The political asylum withdrawal announced by President Lenin Moreno does not follow the appropriate judicial procedure (See Situation report 1. Geneva Convention. Art. 32, 33, 34).

7. Mr Julian Paul Assange was illegally imprisoned and tortured. He's a victim. He is must be treated with the respect due to the victims. He must be released and protected.

Mr. Julian Paul Assange was tortured. UN Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer has issued a scathing report attesting that Mr Julian Paul Assange presents undeniable psychological torture symptoms, but also the possibility for him to die in prison (Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, UN, 2016).

"No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." (European Convention of Human Right. Art. 3)

Mr Julian Paul Assange was tortured in the United Kingdom territory. He was put in solitary confinement 23 hours a day. He has no access to his lawyers or documents used in his defence. Many witnesses have publicly testified to this: Mr. Kritinnn Hrafsonn, Mr. John Pilger, Mr. John Shipton, Mrs. Christine Ann Hawkins, his lawyers.

However, at no time has the United Kingdom taken any measures to protect Julian Paul Assange and to protect him from torture.

However, as the United Kingdom is aware, every state, every citizen, must do everything possible to protect an individual from an illegal imprisonment and torture.

"1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction. 

2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. 

3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture. 

(Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Art.2)

"1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.

2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature."

(Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Art. 4)

"Each State Party shall keep under systematic review interrogation rules, instructions, methods and practices as well as arrangements for the custody and treatment of persons subjected to any form of arrest, detention or imprisonment in any territory under its jurisdiction, with a view to preventing any cases of torture."

(Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Art. 11)

If Mr Julian Paul Assange dies in prison, the United Kingdom Government will bear full responsibility for this death in accordance with the laws set out above. Mr Julian Paul Assange's lawyers (Mrs Gareth Peirce, Mr Mark Summers, Mrs Jennifer Robinson, Mr Geoffrey Robertson, Mr Mark Stephens, Mr Liam Walker, Mr Edward Fitzgerald, etc.) would all be complicit in this death since they have not lodged any complaints against these proven acts of torture and requested that an investigation be conducted.

Article 12 

Each State Party shall ensure that its competent authorities proceed to a prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction. 

Article 13 

Each State Party shall ensure that any individual who alleges he has been subjected to torture in any territory under its jurisdiction has the right to complain to, and to have his case promptly and impartially examined by, its competent authorities. Steps shall be taken to ensure that the complainant and witnesses are protected against all ill-treatment or intimidation as a consequence of his complaint or any evidence given. 

Article 14 

1. Each State Party shall ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In the event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his dependants shall be entitled to compensation. 

Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Art. 12, 13 et 14)

At the 2019 October 11 Westminster Court hearing, Mr. Julian Paul Assange was hard to identify. He had a long, shaggy beard which length is hardly compatible with the time between the event of the leaked video from Belmarsh on may 2019 and at the 2019 October 11 Westminster Court hearing date. The video that leaked from Belmarsh was the more recent showing Mr. Julian Paul Assange. At that time, he wore no beard and had short hair. At the beginning of the 2019 October 11 Westminster Court hearing, Mr Julian Paul Assange was shown on screen arriving and sitting on a chair, his hands hidden under long sleeves, crossing his arms in an impatient and nervous manner, ill at ease; he eventually blocked his hands under his armpits, arms still crossed. He wore the same clothes as the ones he had in the leaked Belmarsh video. He then weirdly introduced himself as Paul Julian Assange and not as Julian Paul Assange, his usual name order. These were the last words he pronounced, he assisted the audience as if he was not personally concerned, like if he was indifferent to his fate. He did not try to intervene, and neither the judge nor his lawyer proposed him to express himself.

Considering the behaviour of Mr. Julian Paul Assange during the 2019 October 11 Westminster Court hearing and his health condition, it appeared to the delegates from our Association, that nothing had been done to remedy the torture of which he is the victim.

At the 2019 October 21 Westminster Court hearing, Mr. Julian Paul Assange confirmed that he was not given the conditions to prepare his defense correctly, that he did not have full access to his papers or his lawyers. At the 2019 October 21 Westminster Court hearing, Mr. Julian Assange affirmed that he has been stolen his computer science discoveries (Children’s DNA). He said " They [know] the interior of my life with my psychologist", which strongly suggests a case of psychological torture. The torture is an inexcusable crime. Yet, the judge did not react to these Julian Paul Assange statements. The words of a victim is paramount during a hearing. The court must take into account the arguments he develops. However, nothing happened like that at the 2019 October 21 Westminster Court hearing. Once again, the British government has violated the presumption of innocence and the right to defense of Mr. Julian Paul Assange.

This is a serious denial of justice, all the most serious, because our WikiJustice Julian Assange association delegates present at the 11 and 21 October 2019 hearings found with concern that Mr. Julian Paul Assange presented many signs of the prisoners placed for a very long time in isolation and tortured in "dark places".

"Koch's (1986, pp. 124–25) study of “acute isolation syndrome” among detainees in Denmark determined that it occurred after only a few days in isolation and included “problems of concentration, restlessness, failure of memory, sleeping problems and impaired sense of time and ability to follow the rhythm of day and night” and could, if the isolated confinement persisted for “a few weeks” or more, lead to “chronic isolation syndrome,” which includes intensified difficulties with memory and concentration, “inexplicable fatigue,” a “distinct emotional lability” that included “fits of rage,” hallucinations, and the “extremely common” belief among isolated prisoners that “they have gone or are going mad.”

"Virtually every symptom of psychological stress and trauma but one (fainting) was suffered by more than half of the prisoners who were assessed (with many of the symptoms being acknowledged by two-thirds or more of the prisoners and some by nearly everyone). Well over half of the prisoners in the sample reported a constellation of symptoms—headaches, trembling, sweaty palms, and heart palpitations—that are known to be distress related."

"Indeed, the subjective experience of social exclusion can result in what have been called cognitive deconstructive states in which there are emotional numbing, reduced empathy, cognitive inflexibility, lethargy, and an absence of meaningful thought (Twenge et al. 2003). DeWall (2013, p. 302) summarized the serious threat that social exclusion represents to psychological health and well-being by noting that it produces “increased salivary cortisol levels…and blood flow to brain regions associated with physical pain” and “sweeping changes” in attention, memory, thinking, and self-regulation as well as changes in aggression and prosocial behavior."

(Restricting the use solitary confinement. Annual Review of Criminologie. Volume 1,2018. Haney, pp 285-310.https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-criminol-032317-092326)

We hold at the disposal of justice, all documents in our possession that reflect the state in which prisoners are subjected to renditions and torture in Dark places (Among others : CIA tortured Unredacted. The Bureau of Investigative Journalisme. University of Westminster. Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament Detainee Mistreatment and Rendition: 2001–2010. Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 28 June 2018)

"Prisoners were held secretly within the programme for months or years on end, always incommunicado (without access to legal representation or other contact with the outside world). All were held in continuous solitary confinement, under conditions designed explicitly to dehu- manise and exert control, and which in themselves clearly amounted to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.

Conditions at some of the sites were dungeon-like, with prisoners held in either complete darkness or constant light, and subjected to continual loud noise, harsh temperatures and a number of ‘conditioning techniques’ designed, in the words of one CIA memo, to reduce them ‘to a baseline, dependent state.’ These required ‘little to no physical interaction between the detainee and the interrogator,’ and were important ‘to demonstrate to the [prisoner] that he has no control over basic human needs.’7 Such techniques, which were applied throughout an indi- vidual’s detention, and were separate from the interrogations under torture, included sustained nudity, sleep deprivation through vertical shackling, diapering, and dietary manipulation."

"First, British intelligence and security agencies worked hand-in-glove with counterterrorism partners, including the CIA, to identify and appre- hend suspects and disappear them into secret detention where torture was endemic. The British role in this context was either to supply the intelligence needed for the apprehension, or to take part in capture operations as formal secondary partners, ensuring that they were not directly responsible for prisoners."

"The role played by the UK in the CIA torture programme is also highlighted by the degree to which British territory was used by CIA aircraft as refuelling stops while undertaking rendition operations. Collation and analysis of flight data associated with CIA rendition aircraft, and the correlation of this with data concerning prisoner transfers, has allowed us to establish that UK involvement in the rendition programme was much more extensive than previously thought. British territory was central to the rendition of at least 28 prisoners between secret prisons, some of whom were subjected to torture."

(CIA tortured Unredacted. The Bureau of Investigative Journalisme. University of Westminster.)

Declaration of Mr Assange in front of Judge Vanessa Baraitser :

"They are saying journalists and whistleblowers are enemies of the people. They have unfair advantages dealing with documents. They [know] the interior of my life with my psychologist. They steal my children’s DNA. This is not equitable what is happening here.”

The words of Mr. Julian Paul Assange allege to extremely serious violations of international laws on human rights and of the laws to intellectual property.

When Julian Paul Assange talks about DNA children, he most probably talks about DNA Computing and Molecular Programming. In computer science, there are three possible types of partitions: the root partition, the parent partition, and the child partition. Each partition has its own memory and processor resources, as well as policies on device usage. We will not define further, the field of research of which Mr. Julian Paul Assange speaks. International experts need to be appointed to investigate.

One can summarize the facts by saying that he was stolen, among other things, his computer science related “children’s DNA” while he is subject to “psychological torture” as stated by Mr Niels Melzer. Julian Paul Assange testified at the 2019 October 21 Westminster Court hearing the acquisition of one of his trade secret without his consent, as defined by The EU Directive on Trade Secret Protection into National Law. It is also a violation of the 1996 US Economic Espionage Act.

"Member States shall ensure that the competent judicial authorities, upon the request of the injured party, order an infringer who knew or ought to have known that he, she or it was engaging in unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of a trade secret, to pay the trade secret holder damages appropriate to the actual prejudice suffered as a result of the unlawful acquisition, use or disclosure of the trade secret. " (The EU Directive on Trade Secret Protection into National Law)

Mr Julian Paul Assange said : “They steal my children’s DNA”. Strictly speaking, this means that the robbery process is going on. If so, there is obvious emergency to stop this process. If his intellectual property was stored in some encrypted files that are not completely in hand of the people he accuses, this means they put him pressure to tell his crypto-codes. There is only one way to force Mr Julian Paul Assange to give his crypto-codes without his consent : this is torture. And if “they” force him to reveal his computer science findings, orally or in a hand written way, directly without his consent, this is also torture.

All countries which have no access to these data suffer damage through unfair concurrence distortion.

As a consequence to these Julian Paul Assange declarations, he should be immediately released and put under protection. (Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Art. 12, 13 et 14)

It is also very important to speed up an investigation to determine:

1. Since when Mr. Julian Paul Assange is being tortured.

2. Where Mr. Julian Paul Assange was tortured, knowing that torture is a crime and no state is entitled to practice it. Every state has the duty to oppose it.

3. Who tortured Mr. Julian Paul Assange.

4. What is the exact scope of “children’s DNA” which were stolen, as Mr Julian Paul Assange declared it in front of the judge Mrs Vanessa Baraitser.

5. Who stole Mr Julian Paul Assange ? Who took possession of his "children DNA". These are indicative notions to be developed with the help of the plaintiff Mr Julian Paul Assange.

In order to get a better idea of what might have been stolen, here are technical details; child partition : "A child partition is primarily logical storage on a physical host machine that is completely dedicated to a virtual machine Each new virtual machine comes with a separate child partition that is logically isolated from the rest of the virtual machines The child partition is used to install the guest operating system for this virtual machine and store the data and applications as a typical hard disk partition. A child partition can not access hardware resources directly, but its own quota of computing resources and memory is allocated by the hypervisor. The entire child partition is created and managed by the root or parent partition that runs the hypervisor.

A DNA child partition is an unlimited storage capacity whose coding can be modified. In fact, it works on the principle of encoding in human DNA."

6. Why no country opposed and does not oppose the torture practiced on Mr Julian Paul Assange. Mr. Nils Melzer was very clear, though. Mr. Julian Paul Assange risk dying after the effects of the tortures inflicted if he is not immediately released.

Article 2 

1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction. 

2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. 

3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture. 

Article 3 

1. No State Party shall expel, return ("refouler") or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture. 

2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights. 

Article 4 

1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture. 2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature. 

Article 5 

1. Each State Party shall take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over the offences referred to in article 4 in the following cases: 

(a) When the offences are committed in any territory under its jurisdiction or on board a ship or aircraft registered in that State; 

(b) When the alleged offender is a national of that State; 

(c) When the victim is a national of that State if that State considers it appropriate. 

2. Each State Party shall likewise take such measures as may be necessary to establish its jurisdiction over such offences in cases where the alleged offender is present in any territory under its jurisdiction and it does not extradite him pursuant to article 8 to any of the States mentioned in paragraph I of this article. 

3. This Convention does not exclude any criminal jurisdiction exercised in accordance with internal law.

f a member of your family dies in circumstances that involve the state, you may have the right to an investigation. The state is also required to investigate suspicious deaths and deaths in custody.

The courts have decided that the right to life does not include a right to die.

(Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

The right to life and freedom of Mr Julian Paul Assange must be ensured by the. government of the United Kingdom

The Human Rights Act 1998 sets out the fundamental rights and freedoms that everyone in the UK is entitled to. It incorporates the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic British law. The Human Rights Act came into force in the UK in October 2000.

Article 2 is often referred to as an ‘absolute right’. These are rights that can never be interfered with by the state. This means that nobody, including the Government, can try to end your life. It also means the Government should take appropriate measures to safeguard life by making laws to protect you and, in some circumstances, by taking steps to protect you if your life is at risk.

Public authorities should also consider your right to life when making decisions that might put you in danger or that affect your life expectancy.

Mr. Julian Paul Assange was tortured. His alleged that his intellectual property were stolen. He suffer serious consequences of the tortures endured.

It is urgent that the English government release him. If it happened that Julian Paul Assange dieds in prison, whatever the nature of this death, the UK governement must bear the full responsibility.

Moreover, in view of the state of health of Mr. Julian Paul Assange, suffering endured, torture and their serious consequences, we ask the United Kingdom to put an end to the extradition procedure by applying the Article 25 of the Extradition Act 2003 :

This section applies if at any time in the extradition hearing it appears to the judge that the condition in subsection (2) is satisfied.

(2) The condition is that the physical or mental condition of the person in respect of whom the Part 1 warrant is issued is such that it would be unjust or oppressive to extradite him.

(3) The judge must—

(a) order the person’s discharge, or

(b) adjourn the extradition hearing until it appears to him that the condition in subsection (2) is no longer satisfied.

Conclusion

We have demonstrated hereby, and through the report of situation 1 here attached, that Mr. Julian Paul Assange is a political prisoner. He has never been convicted of any crime. He is illegally imprisoned. He is tortured. He suffers from serious consequences of the tortures inflicted on him. He alleged his scientific discoveries are being stolen.

We gave all the necessary guarantees to the English State concerning the assumption of responsibility for Mr. Julian Paul Assange. He holds an address in France. A French medical team is ready to receive him. We are waiting for his lawyers to give us his passport to get him a temporary residence permit. We guarantee that he will attend extradition hearings as soon as his state of health is compatible with the legal requirements, when his state of health permits and that he has been able to arrange his defense as permitted by law.

Accordingly, we ask the English state to release Mr. Julian Paul Assange. Our teams have already organized the arrangements for its his transfer to France. Our delegates will pick him up. Likewise, our delegates will accompany him to every hearing.

Hoping for a prompt response from you, it is a matter of a man's life, innocent; 

Respectfully Yours,

On behalf of WikiJustice Julian Assange Association

Véronique Pidancet Barrière

President

All our documents are in open source on all our sites