The Case of Julian Assange

Over the years, we have witnessed the true test of press freedoms. The most notable case in history of this test was arguably the Pentagon Papers. Now, we are reliving that nightmare through the case of Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks.

Julian Assange is being accused of attempting to help Chelsea Manning, a U.S. Army intelligence analyst, with hacking into a government database to receive the classified materials he later posted to his platform. Many people are arguing that, if he is convicted, this would “pose serious threats to press freedom.” It is also argued that this case “seeks to criminalize what journalists are not only permitted but ethically required to do: take steps to help their sources maintain their anonymity.”

I believe that Chelsea Manning was rightfully charged with espionage and theft due to her release of over 750,000 classified and sensitive military and diplomatic documents. As an intelligence analyst, you sign an NDA, which most certainly includes leaking information to a news source. With that being said, Julian Assange does not deserve the charges he is currently being faced with. As an investigative journalist, Assange had the right to try to help his source keep their anonymity. More importantly, he was not the one who actually accessed and released the classified documents.

The U.S. government jumped the gun with Assange’s charges, perhaps out of anger or fear. If convicted of these crimes, what would it mean for future journalists? Will they have to live in fear of prosecution? Will sources still come forward knowing they may feel the wrath of the judicial system? The outcome of this case will definitely shed light on the answers.