resigned, we are not entirely familiar with the plea that you are made to enter into. and if for questions off, which you feel it would not be appropriate to answer, please don't hesitate to indicate, and that will be understood. could i call upon miss bell? to ask the question, thank you. yeah, thank you very much for for being with us for, for sharing your testimony. as far as i understood i need, are you k called snow to european court of human rights to get got any final decision in your case. i, on the one hand, i would like to know to personally to know how the fields for you went on the other case. i would like to know whether you have any suggestions, systematically, legally, how cases like yours could really be settled in, in the, in the legal system that looks correctly and properly

opposite 14 years detained in the u. k, including over 5 years and a maximum security prison and facing a 175 year sentence. with the prospect of g is more in prison. before being able to have his shots at the european court of human rights by the accepted a plea offered from united states that would release me from prison. immediately, united states insisted that i not be allowed to take a case in relation to what has happened to me in relation to its ex, additional proceedings. know that i, i could even file

a freedom of information act request on the us government to see what was done they will never be a hearing into what has happened. and that's why it's so important that the pace backs the uncertainty within europe as to the defenses that can be used by journalists here to protect themselves from transactional repression, index edition if lifting its current state will inevitably be abused by other states. and so, you know, i'm setting institutions like pop pace must move to make the situation

clear to what happened to me cannot happen again of the mission of eco mr. that sounds that is great to have you today and committee meeting. and in fact i, i'm, i don't want to ask about the past more or less, which pass, but the past is still the and, and the current cost. yeah. it's not in the, it's enough to finish the of, of course. but i wanted to ask you whether you believe that to our proceedings here and the council of europe in case, and hopefully that report to the people to buy. so now i've, i've dealt to you is going to be accepted at the peanut recession. that will reverse the negative impact that your case had on the position of whistle blowers

and the right to it and expression the middle body that really you'll help for that to that in the in case we in the be parties and is going to be accepted to them and your visits here to parliament will in their way, will have this positive aspect and to will improve the situation in, in this regard of the, the rights of the and i just and, and so on. that's mike m m in, but also i would like to add to how you visualize your life now after you. okay, so i'm not asking very much about your private plans, the bad thing. 10. uh what, what do you think? what do i planning to do? basically, thank you. well, i think that i am here because i believe it isn't the central

1st step, a page to act to get the ball rolling to address the problems of transnational repression. and also to make it clear that national security journalism is possible within european borders . as for my re application to the big wide world outside of house arrest and even disease age and maximum security, prison control take some adjustment. and it's not simply the spooky sound of electric cause very spooky but it's the is also the change in the

society. the way we once produced a ford where he once released the important war crimes videos. and that's the public debate. now, every day, there live stream har, as from that it was in ukraine. and the warren casa hundreds of journalists have been killed. garza and ukraine combined. impunity seems to mount and it is still on said what we can do about it. i rehabilitation to

the world, the course includes some positive but still tricky things be coming up all that again to children who have grown up without me becoming a husband again stephen doing with the mother in law the see the trying family issues know she's she's a very lovely one. i liked the thank you mrs. hassan. could i call upon mr. client voc up, please? yes, thank you mr. president. back to saturday issue. how well and your experience

does political asylum really work in today's world? political asylum is an absolutely essential relief valve. for human rights abuses with the states that people can leave a state that is persecuting them. not only saves individual lives, it provides a mechanism with journalist can continue to report on their societies off today have been handed out. ultimately, the threats of people leaving a state is what the final analysis controls it's big it's behavior. we have seen examples in history of

states that made it difficult or impossible for people to leave. and we can see how the situation for people leaving their collapse and must be competition between states are to be good places for people to live and to work is sold on asylum through being through translational repression, to another model. in my case, it was difficult to find a state that would give this item that i was able to get to there is a big gap in the asylum system for people who are not playing their own state. they're playing an ally of that state

or any 3rd state. that was my case. asylum lloyd does not easily come about the case where say in australian, explain persecution by the united states. we could imagine it has ex donnie fling persecution by russia. we're trying was not able to apply for asylum within the u. k. cause the u. k. has its own particular political angle. it might have been difficult to convince the quotes to give me or in fact, any one asylum relation to united states in the u. k. but there wasn't even a chance because citizens from 3rd states under the

1951 convention as it's implemented in most european states, cannot apply for asylum. thank you, mr. assigned. mr. hunger, would you like to ask a question? 6. thank you very much. i missed the salt salt. i'm so happy to see you here to see stella as well. and thank you for reminding lots of paste it in the last 4 years. and so starting with a hearing we had in january 2020 was your father township than i was near the merits, a z when general wrap up to her and torture and very important other persons and 3 times. uh, i think this assembly made a clear position, quoting for the prompt release, and i think um this assembly and

a bit be proud of it because it's a it and other international state organizations i've heard of times as well in the european union parliament. and it was city, but none of those quotes um at, at enough coverage to, to, to made the statement not enough to your political diversity. sorry. perhaps not enough to your political diversity. maybe maybe maybe that so so i'm, i'm, i'm very happy. i'm uh, maybe a question on of the extra dorothy good drawers that go on repression. you'll, you'll talked about in the end because this is one of the most shocking for me that there is a law in the us on freedom of speech. whether it's not uh for uh,

other citizens, by the laws that can be applied to other citizens. what could we do? s, elementary assembly or as a console bureau of europe in states to count of this stuff. okay, that's what us on the, in the final u. k. high high court case, which i one and us a peeled against one under the basis of nationality discrimination. that is in the u. k. expedition act, you're not meant to discriminate on a trial for doing

a penalty phase. again, someone on the basis of the nationality, the cus tried different tricks to get around that in the u. k. system. and it was uncertain whether we were the i or the united states would ultimately prevail. however, there is nothing in the european shot to that prevents nationality discrimination in relation to expedition. so this is a small protection. it was hard to use within the u. k. existing act but it's not clear that it exists in most european states of the thank you that miss making them.

thank you mr. chairs and thank you mr. ourselves that you're here basis. done work on trends. no. so refreshing rest dates go up to someone in another states, in this case, in your case there are these very toppling allegations about the c i a monitoring and even considering us as a nation. can you comment more on those? and um, how do you yourself see your status a very here political presenter? the 1st part of your questions about the ca the 2nd part was about. do i see myself?

is it the prisoner answering the 1st one 1st. yes, that was a political prisoner, the political basis for the us government's richard, beauty, backs against me was in relation to publishing the truth about what the us government had done then in a form of legal sense. once the us proceeded with its legal retribution. i used the espionage act, a classic political events in relation to the series campaign of transactional repression against which he weeks as

we step that something was going on at the time they weren't. there were many small signs that came together but having a homeless feeling and some subtlety put tips from a weasel blowing and one of the security contractors that the c i had contracted didn't give me the full and disturbing pitcher which later managed to the interesting example where intelligence organization has targeted an investigative organization

which he makes as a result of our investigations, a criminal case in spain, and in particular, work done by us journalists, which is a precedent that has been established in my case, might well now be themselves criminal, detailed information about the actions of the ca took, came out. those details involved the testimony of more than 30 current or former us intelligence officials and a there to resulting processes. a criminal case in spain with a number of victims, including my wife,

by some the people who came to visit made the embassy lawyers, journalists thought, and a civil suit in the united states, against the se. in the united states. the c a has in response to that civil seat declared, formerly by the c i director and the attorney general state secrets privilege to lock out the case. the claim is the ca may have your defense, but that defense is classified and so that the case, the single case cannot go for it, so it's complete. impunity within the us system. thank you, mr. rock. come down by 2 to us question. mr

. assange. if you could go back in time, would you do everything the same? and if not, what, which is a different way. i must ask congestion to terms of personal costs that you suffered . but also in terms of effectiveness or impact of what you try to do. thank you. this is a very deep question about free will. why do people do things when they do them? looking back we will offer and constrained by our resources. the number of stop by secrecy was necessary to protect our sources of the

if i could go back and have a lot of extra resources. of course, a political approaches media approaches could of maximize the even further the impact to the revelations that we made. but i suppose your question is, is trying to say, well, were there any notes that could be turned in hindsight, of course, thousands of small things. i was not from united kingdom. i had a good friend in united kingdom govern mcfadden, who is an american journalist, a very good man. but it took me time to when i,

once i was trapped in united kingdom, it took me time to understand what you guys society was about. he would trust you couldn't trust the different types of men news is that a made in that society and so there are different media partners that perhaps we could have chosen differently. so thank you mr. trump. could invite you to you with the subjects of a european arrest warrant issued by suite. to what extent do you

think that your peer, the rest florence being used as tools of repression? and to what extent do you think the rules could be changed so that they can no longer be used for that purpose? so your p interest for an system was introduced by september 11 with the political rational that it would be used for the foss transfer of the muslim terrorist between european states. the 1st european arrest warrant that was issued was issued by sweden for a drunk driver. we must understand that when we pick a dissipated group muslims at that time and

say, well, this were oppressive legislation, it's only going to be for them. inevitably, bureaucrats, elements of the security state will seize upon those measures and apply the more broad weight and injustice to one person spread soon enough to most people. and i don't know the city sticks on how often restaurants are abused. as i was, there was an attempt to expedite me without any charge from the united kingdom by sweden. the u. k. government subsequently changed the law to prevent expedition without charge, but in its amendment to the existing legislation. it included

a right to make sure it didn't apply to me. thank you, mr. kaufman. could i invite you to address the question to mister saunders? thank you. thank you very much, sir. thank you very much, mr. sauce for all the answers to many of our questions. i am like many of my colleagues here, very happy to see you here and knowing you out of prison. you were imprisoned to set rightly for doing your job. the job that we all you expect you to do, namely being a turn that is to investigate, to then you published your findings. but it is shocking to me and to many of us to see how long the um of us just is that can get a grip on you even here in europe. and of course, this raise questions that we would address tomorrow. and mrs. ever stopped this excellent report. but can i ask you a personal question? were you aware before all this,

were you ever aware of how lead to your basic rights as a citizen, but also as a journalist, we're protected in europe. and what if i may add another question? what do you think? would it be the effect on journalism as a whole? from your case, thank you. we performed a legal analysis to understand what the abilities and limitations were within europe for publishing documents from a number of different countries including united states. we understood that in theory, article 10 should protect general senior. similarly, looking at the us post amendment to its constitution that no publisher had

ever been prosecuted for publishing classified information from united states either domestically or internationally. so i expected some kind of harassment legal process. i was prepared to fight for that. i believe the value of these publications was such as it is okay to have that fight and that we would prevail because we had understood what was legally possible my neighbor to a was believing in the law. and when push comes to shove laws that just pieces of paper and they can be reinterpreted

for political expediency. and they are the rules made by the ruling costs more broadly. and if those rules don't suit what it wants to do, i did re interprets them or hopefully changes them, which is clearer, indicates united states we and good one of the constituent powers of the united states. the intelligence sector, the security state, the secrecy states, it was powerful enough to push for re interpretation. the us constitution. us comforts. the us 1st amendment seems pretty black and white to me

. it's very short. it says the congress shall make no law restricting speech or the press the however, that was the the, that the us constitution, those presidents relating to it. um we just, uh, re interpreted away. and yes, perhaps ultimately, if i got into the supreme court of united states and i was still live in that system, so i might have one depending on what the makeup was of the us supreme court. but in the meantime,

i had last 14 years on the health risk embassy, cj and maximum security prison. so i, i think this is an important lesson said when a major power faction wants to reinterpret the law, it can push to have the elements of the state, in this case, the u. s. department justice to that and it doesn't care too much about what is legal and that's something for much late a day in the meantime. the deterrent effect that it's 6, the rich beat of actions that it see. 6, i've had their effect.