Parmeshwar Devkota

Among many forms of journalism, the investigative journalism is the toughest, as it seeks to provide factual information to public. For getting authentic information, visiting the streets and slums cannot be sufficient. For such information, a reporter having zeal either has to follow a private or public institution or work secretly with the help of agents or technology. In the past, the use of one or many agents was common. But today, technology is being used to make a scoop on social, political or economic issues.
In the past, investigative journalists had limited areas to explore. They used to focus on powerful persons and institutions. Unlike the past trend, they now concentrate their attention on the public institutions like bureaucracy, police and army and their affairs with the help of technology.
Such an attempt was made by an Australia-born Julian Assange in the past decade. He extracted a huge bunch of state secretes of many government organisations and disclosed them, shocking even the most powerful governments in Germany, Britain and the United States of America.
On charge of disclosing state secrets, espionage, cyber-attacks and other crimes, an order was issued to arrest Assange, but he sought an asylum at the Embassy of Ecuador based in Britain for nine years.
Now, Assange is facing extradition charges from the USA. He has been in the Belmarsh prison in London for two years. Recently, a district court judge named Vanessa Baraitser ordered that Assange could not be extradited for trial to the USA on his health grounds. The ruling of the judge has opened a new chapter of discussion in the world because investigative journalists consider him as an icon in their field. However, wealthy organisations, powerful institutions and states around the world consider him as a traitor.
Therefore, the case of Assange should be analysed from the perspective of the state, journalists and human rights.
From the state’s point of view, the deed that Assange had done is espionage and cybercrime. The USA had introduced the Espionage Act in 1917. The Act had provisioned a maximum sentence of 20 years for those who attempt to cause ‘insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, or refusal of duty in the military or naval forces.
From the investigative journalists’ point of view, he is an icon of modern-day journalism because his attempt was just to inform the deeds and decisions of governments. So, journalists working in the print, electronic and online media have been supporting Assange’s cause. Even the US-based Freedom of the Press Foundation has tweeted, ‘The extradition request was not decided on press freedom grounds; rather, the judge essentially ruled the US prison system was too repressive to extradite. However, the result will protect journalists everywhere.”
From human rights perspective, human rights organisations have said the charges on Assange undermined free speech around the world. In this regard, a plea made by Assange’s fiancée Stella Moris, who is also the mother of two children, to the US President, is heart-touching. “Mr. President, tear down these prison walls. Let our little boys have their father. Free Julian, free the press, free us all.”