Wikileaks' publishing of US cables not illegal: AFP
- 17 December, 2010 13:22
- Comments 1
The Federal Government has been dealt a major blow with the Australian Federal Police (AFP) stating that it has found that the publishing of US embassy cables containing classified information on the Wikileaks website has breached no domestic law.
In a statement the AFP said it had been asked by the Attorney-General’s Department on 30 November to examine the matter and determine whether an official investigation was warranted.
“The AFP has completed its evaluation of the material available and has not established the existence of any criminal offences where Australia would have jurisdiction,” the statement reads.
The AFP did offer the government the caveat that where additional cables were published and criminal offences were suspected, “these matters should be referred to the AFP for evaluation”.
The finding follows a ruling by London's High Court that Assange be freed if he posts £240,000 ($378,000) in bail, rejecting prosecutors' appeal that he be imprisoned pending a January extradition hearing.
It is also is a major blow to the Federal Government which has argued that both the initial leaking of classified documents and their subsequent distribution by the controversial website were illegal.
"The unauthorised obtaining of the information may well be an offence," Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, said in early December.
"The distribution of that information I would think would have a solid argument, again without knowing the United States law, would be an offence.
"Certainly to release that sort of information by an officer of the commonwealth, if it were Australian material, would in my view certainly involve criminality."
Australia's main media players found the Federal Government's reaction to the release of diplomatic correspondence by the WikiLeaks website "deeply troubling", prompting an open letter to Prime Minister Julia Gillard in support of WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange.
"The volume of the leaks is unprecedented, yet the leaking and publication of diplomatic correspondence is not new," the letter, initiated by the Walkley Foundation, states.
Despite threats from Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, and Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, that Assange may have his Australian passport cancelled, foreign affairs minister Kevin Rudd has defended the legal rights of Assange.
In mid-December Rudd said he was prepared to intervene to have a laptop computer provided for Assange in London's Wandsworth prison to help the Australian prepare his defence and obtain bail at his appearance at Westminster Magistrates Court on Tuesday.
Follow Tim Lohman on Twitter: @TLohman
Follow Computerworld Australia on Twitter: @ComputerworldAU
- Bookmark this page
- Share this article
- Got more on this story? Email Computerworld
- Follow Computerworld on twitter
-
Anonymous Takes Aim at Indian Government
-
Java creator: Fears over consequences of possible Oracle trial win may be overblown
-
Detroit makes pitch for ousted Yahoo employees
-
LightSquared question is in FCC's hands now
-
EU Parliament to vote on ACTA without waiting for a court decision
-
Windows 7 for Seniors for Dummies®
-
Windows 7 for Dummies® Dvd+book Bundle
-
Computers for Seniors for Dummies, 2nd Edition
-
Teach Yourself Visually Windows 7
-
Excel 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
-
Microsoft Office
-
Office 2007 for Dummies
-
Windows 7 for Dummies®
-
Office 2007 All-In-One Desk Reference for Dummies
Comments
konsyltacii
The basis of legal protection, Mr. Julian Paul Assange of WikiLeaks could be justification for its compliance with existing international law and fundamental human rights (including this and the right to know who controls the people and what they as an intellectual, moral or and professional level, in so far as regards their ability to regulate public social processes).
In addition, there is legal justification of his right not to disclose sources of information, if released information corresponds to reality and affects the basic rights of many people.
Regarding of formal charges, Julian Paul Assange (Julian Paul Assange) from WikiLeaks: judging by the charges against him (published in the online information), it probably is not the accused should be, it is likely the victim, because of the very essence of the charges it is clear that it is the actual discrimination and baseless carping from the opposite side, having little to do with human rights and simple logic.
If it is true what is written on the Internet, Julian Paul Assange got into this situation by formally put forward claims of activists of the feminist movement, which I think is unreasonable requirements, violating his rights as a person. Formally put forward the claim to be in violation, in my opinion, international law and established international human rights law, even in Sweden and have such laws, so distorting the relationship between men and women. Human rights can not be waived or prohibited by national law any country - is repealing the Human Rights Act would be unlawful. The discussion should not abuse the rights and on equality - it means respect for the equal rights of men and their parity, negotiation of reciprocal rights with mutual responsibilities. Me it seems to that in this case is present abuse of right, overstatement of rights for one side due to the illegal diminishing of rights for other side. Therefore, even if in terms of morality, not really nice to meet two girls, from the point of view of the law - he is innocent, if they met voluntarily and without violence.
I do not understand the position of the Australian Government. Julian Paul Assange, if I understood correctly, is the citizen of Australia, a prosecution was pulled out him in one country, detained in other country. The government of Australia is not interested in the fate of an Australian citizen and it does not want to fulfill their responsibilities to protect its citizens?
http://blogs.pravda.ru/users/3039108/blog
http://konsyltacii.livejournal.com
http://community.livejournal.com/konsylt
http://my.mail.ru/community/konsyltacii.com
http://planeta.rambler.ru/users/konsyltacii
I think that Americans must remember, what people wrote their Constitution, what country they dreamed about, must remember about Bill of Rights.
Necessary to protect not only the rights of women, but as it turns out, and the rights of men.
Post new comment