Peter Whish-Wilson (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answer given by the Minister for Foreign Affairs (Senator Wong) in response to a question without notice asked by Senator Shoebridge today relating to Mr Julian Assange.

At 9.30 tonight, the UK courts will make a historic decision about the future of Walkley Award winning journalist Julian Assange. It could be the end of the road for Mr Assange. It could be the end of the road for many people, including in this place, who have campaigned for his freedom, and it could be the end of the road for press freedoms in western democracies. Of course, the courts are deciding whether to hear a full appeal against Mr Assange's extradition to the United States. This is the country whose war crimes and corruption WikiLeaks published over a series of years, and these are the same publications and information used by journalists all around the world to expose the Iraq war—and Mr Assange is the only one behind bars.

Senator Shoebridge asked Minister Wong what her government was doing to seek the freedom of Julian Assange. I acknowledge that, in the other place just two weeks ago, a motion passed the chamber calling for his release. The Prime Minister spoke on that motion, and the government supported that motion. Sadly, the LNP, Mr Dutton, who has made public comments about wanting to see Mr Assange released, didn't support that motion. Nevertheless, this place, the Senate and the House, have come a long way from the years when the Prime Minister used to be on the speed dial of the head of the CIA and openly boast about that. We've at least been able to shift public opinion and shift political opinion in support of Mr Assange's freedom.

Senator Wong said today, 'Enough is enough.' That's what the government's been saying for months. But Senator Shoebridge specifically asked, 'What are you doing?' and his second question was the most important: 'Will there be consequences' if our supposed close friend and ally extradites Julian Assange, a political prisoner, to the US? This would be the first time in history that the US government has sought extradition of a foreign journalist for activities on foreign soil using espionage charges. This precedent is deeply worrying to journalists and people all around the world. It has been condemned by the key media outlets in the United States as well as international unions of journalists and many other august commentators, yet still the show rolls on.

The best that we can hope for tonight is that the UK judges, who finally, in the recent appeal, heard substantive information about the political campaign against Mr Assange, including information about CIA plots to assassinate Mr Assange—all now on record. I just hope that the UK judges understand the seriousness of this extradition and what is at stake. It's not just Mr Assange's health, his wellbeing and that of his family, including his wife, Stella; his children; his father, John; and his brother, Gabriel. Freedom of speech in our democracy is at stake here. If the most powerful nation on the planet can extradite a foreign journalist because they don't like what they publish, what kind of precedent is that setting? This is not just for our Western democracies; what message does that send other countries that we often rightly criticise for their human rights records and their records on freedom of press—totalitarian regimes? We are talking about the United States of America and an Australian citizen, an award-winning journalist who many people lauded for his exposes around the Iraq war.

I'll be listening in at 9.30 tonight and I know a lot of Australians will be. I expect our government to act if Mr Assange is extradited to the United States. Have consequences put on the table. This has to affect our relationship. I know Australians will stand up for Mr Assange.

Question agreed to.