Assange's wife speaks: 'Julian is a symbol for freedom for all. In some ways, like Bitcoin'
Stella Assange, wife of the well-known Wikileaks founder since 2022, exclusively tells Il Sole 24 Ore about the steps that led to the release, on 24 June, of the Australian journalist and activist, who returned to freedom after five years in prison thanks to a plea bargain with the United States. He also recounts the role Bitcoin played in the affair
by Vito Lops
5' min read
5' min read
"The fight for Julian's freedom was a long one. It took time to build a movement and a public understanding of the importance of his case, his freedom and how it actually concerned the freedom of us all'. Stella Assange, wife of the well-known Wikileaks founder since 2022, exclusively tells Il Sole 24 Ore about the steps that led to the release, on 24 June, of the Australian journalist and activist, who returned to freedom after five years in prison thanks to a plea bargain with the United States.
How has Julian's fight for freedom been experienced over the years? And what lessons did he learn from his experience?
"As time went on, there was a turning point where there were fewer and fewer people who supported his imprisonment. Everyone I spoke to, everyone who spoke publicly, except the US Department of Justice, said Julian should not be in prison. But it took time, and this is a bittersweet lesson: Julian had to pay with years of his life to gain his freedom. In fact, the guarantees that should exist for journalists are not there, because Julian should never have spent a single day in prison'.
Was his release a surprise?
"Not for me. Nor, I think, was it for those who lived it from the inside, closely following the way the US administration was talking about Julian's case and the legal developments in the extradition case. I thought it was clear that Julian was improving his political position over time, because it was a political case. Legally, yes, he was very close to extradition. But on the other hand, politically, there was support within the US Congress, on both political sides, that this case was dangerous for freedom of the press. All the civil society groups, the human rights groups, the press freedom groups, were saying that this case was very dangerous and should be dismissed. Moreover, the simple fact of Julian's imprisonment for so long made people realise that this was a grave injustice. He was in the UK's maximum security prison, Belmarsh, where terrorists are detained. It was so arbitrary: he was charged for publishing information of great public interest, concerning war crimes. I think many books and films contributed to a public understanding that this was a grave injustice. And that is what finally unblocked the situation'.
