WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can be extradited from UK to US: UK High Court rules
London, Dec 10: Julian Assange can be extradited from the UK to the US, the High Court in London ruled on Friday, overturning a lower court decision that the embattled WikiLeaks founder could not be sent to America to face spying charges due to concerns over his mental health.
The 50-year-old Australian has been charged in the US under the Espionage Act for his role in publishing thousands of classified military and diplomatic documents in 2010 and 2011. US prosecutors say the leaks of classified material endangered lives.
Friday's ruling means the US authorities won their appeal against a January UK court ruling that Assange could not be extradited due to concerns over his mental health after the court was felt reassured by the US promises to reduce the risk of suicide.
Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett and Lord Justice Holroyde handed down the judgment following a hearing in October. Assange's fiancee, Stella Moris, said they intended to appeal against the "grave miscarriage of justice".
In January, District Judge Vanessa Baraitser, presiding over the case at the Old Bailey court in London, ruled that Assange was likely to take his own life if extradited to the US where he is wanted on 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse over WikiLeaks publication of leaked military and diplomatic documents a decade ago.
The charges carry a maximum sentence of 175 years in prison.
The High Court judges found that Judge Barrister had based her decision on the risk of Assange being held in highly restrictive prison conditions if extradited. However, the US authorities later gave assurances that he would not face those strictest measures either pre-trial or post-conviction unless he committed an act in the future that required them.
Lord Burnett said: "That risk is in our judgment excluded by the assurances which are offered. It follows that we are satisfied that, if the assurances had been before the judge, she would have answered the relevant question differently.
"That conclusion is sufficient to determine this appeal in the USA's favour."
Lawyers acting for the US also argued Assange's health is well enough for extradition.
Judges ordered the case must return to Westminster Magistrates' Court for a district judge to formally send it to Home Secretary Priti Patel.
Assange's legal team said any appeal to the Supreme Court would relate to the question of assurances, rather than on issues such as free speech or "the political motivation of the US extradition request".
The US had offered four assurances, including that Assange would not be subject to solitary confinement pre or post-trial or detained at the ADX Florence Supermax jail - a maximum security prison in Colorado - if extradited.
Lawyers for the US said he would be allowed to transfer to Australia to serve any prison sentence he may be given closer to home, the BBC reported.
Assange was arrested in April 2019 when British authorities entered the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he had been holed up for seven years, and took him into custody on a US extradition warrant.
Assange has been held in Belmarsh Prison since 2019 after he was carried out of the Ecuadorian embassy by police before being arrested for breaching his bail conditions.
He had been living in the Ecuadorian Embassy since 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden to face sex offence allegations, which he has always denied and were eventually dropped.
Assange's fiancee Moris called the ruling "dangerous and misguided", adding that the US assurances were "inherently unreliable".
In an emotional statement outside the court, Moris said: "For the past... two years and a half, Julian has remained in Belmarsh prison, and in fact he has been detained since 7 December 2010 in one form or another, 11 years. For how long can this go on?"
Wikileaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson said in a statement: "Julian's life is once more under grave threat, and so is the right of journalists to publish material that governments and corporations find inconvenient.
"This is about the right of a free press to publish without being threatened by a bullying superpower," Hrafnsson said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
SC issues pan-India directions for road safety, says expressways should not become corridor of peril
New Delhi (PTI): Observing that expressways must not become corridors of peril due to administrative lethargy or infrastructural gaps, the Supreme Court has issued a slew of pan-India guidelines for enhancing road safety, including a ban on parking of heavy vehicles on such roads.
A bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar pointed out that national highways constitute two percent of India’s total road length but account for nearly 30 percent of all road fatalities.
A bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and AS Chandurkar issued directions to the Ministry of Road and Transport, National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) and States and Union Territories to make roads safer, observing that the loss of even a single life to avoidable hazards like illegal parking or blackspots etc., represents a failure of the State’s protective umbrella.
"The loss of even a single life to avoidable hazards like illegal parking or blackspots etc., represents a failure of the State's protective umbrella. The 'Right to Life' enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India is not merely a guarantee against the unlawful taking of life, but a positive mandate upon the State to ensure a safe environment where human life is preserved and valued," the top court said in its order of April 13.
It passed the order in a suo motu case registered in the aftermath of the loss of 34 lives in successive road accidents on November 2 and 3, 2025, in Phalodi in Rajasthan, and Rangareddy in Telangana on the systemic negligence and catastrophic infrastructure failures that led to these inevitable casualties.
The bench, which issued pan-India directions said, “Recognising the safety of the commuter as an integral facet of the right to live with dignity as a constitutional obligation under Article 21 of Constitution of India, it is necessary in the interest to address the systematic root causes that these interim directions are issued in exercise of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India.”
ALSO READ: Fire breaks out in Faridabad's Mujesar Industrial Area, no causalities
The bench said the court reiterates that no pecuniary or administrative constraint can outweigh the sanctity of human life, and the strict timelines provided herein reflect the urgency of this constitutional obligation.
It directed no heavy or commercial vehicle shall park/stop on any national highway carriageway or paved shoulder except at a designated bay, lay-bye, or wayside amenity.
It said enforcement of the direction shall be effected through the Advanced Traffic Management System – ATMS real-time alerts to State Police, GPS – timestamped photographic evidence, and integrated eChallan generation.
"These directions must be complied with by the officials and personnel of National Highway Authority of India, state police, state transport department. The district magistrates of the concerned districts shall set-up a standard operating procedure for this purpose as regards periodical inspections and patrolling by all these authorities. These directions must be complied within 60 days from the date of this order," it said.
One of the important directions included prohibition with immediate effect on construction/operation of any new dhaba, eatery, or commercial structure within the Right of Way (ROW) of any national highway.
"District magistrates shall enforce demolition/removal of all new or existing unauthorised structures within 60 days, in terms of the CNH Act procedure and SOP dated August 7, 2025," the bench directed.
It said no department, authority, or local body shall grant or renew any licence, NOC, or trade approval for any site within highway safety zones without prior NHAI/PWD clearance and all such existing licences for such sites shall be reviewed within 30 days.
The bench further directed, "In every district wherever the national highway passes through, the concerned district magistrate within 15 days of this order constitute a district highway safety task force in every district across India within seven days of this order, comprising officers of the district administration, police, NHAI (or concerned land-owning agency), PWD, and local bodies."
Similarly, it further directed surveillance, patrolling and illegal parking surveillance of national highways, operationalisation of Advanced Traffic Management System – ATMS comprising cameras, speed detectors, emergency response and wayside amenities, construction of truck lay-bye facilities, accident blackspots and lighting and institutional co-ordination, reporting and road safety committee.
It directed MoRTH to file a compliance report after seeking data from different states and agencies before this court within 75 days from the date of uploading of this order.
"The respective authorities may take appropriate steps to coordinate with and facilitate all stakeholders for the purpose of carrying out the directions passed by this court. It is further made clear that, in case there are issues regarding compliance, the parties are at liberty to approach this Court," the bench said, as it has posted the matter for compliance after two months.
On December 15, last year, the top court mulled formulating pan-India guidelines to prevent road accidents on expressways and national highways.
