Julian Assange and a coalition of activists and journalists filed a lawsuit on Wednesday against the military judge overseeing Army Pfc. Bradley Manning’s trial in a bid to open access to the secretive proceedings.
During the trial both access to transcripts and prosecution and
defense motions have been virtually inaccessible.
Bradley, who faces a life sentence over the leaking of more than
700,000 sensitive military documents published by Wikileaks, is
currently being tried by a military tribunal. The trial is expected
to begin on June 3, 2013.
The judge overseeing Manning’s court-martial announced this week
that she will close portions of the trial to the public in order to
protect classified material. Prosecutors are expected to call 150
witnesses to testify against Manning, while two dozen witnesses may
be able to provide their testimony in closed sessions.
Shayana Kadidal, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional
Rights which is part of the legal challenge, described the effort
as a last ditch attempt.
“If this lawsuit fails, Manning’s
trial will take place under conditions where journalists and the
public will be unable as a practical matter to follow what is going
on in the courtroom,” says Kadidal.
“The federal civilian courts are
now our last option,” she added.
Assange’s co-plaintiffs in the legal injunction include Guardian
columnist Glenn Greenwald, Democracy Now! host Amy Goodman, and The
Nation magazine. The coalition seeks to force the release of files
currently being kept out of the public’s access.
The same group previously filed a similar lawsuit in military
courts that was shot down in a 3-2 decision by the United States
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces last month. Now, they are
hoping that the same legal request will fare better in a civilian
court.
The group’s preliminary injunction is expected to be presented
in front of a Maryland US District Court shortly after Manning’s
trial begins in June.
Though the pretrial process has been opaque, prosecutors did say
this week that they had agreed not to pursue a charge that Manning
had violated the federal Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, which could
potentially reduce any prison sentence by eight years. According to
the Washington Post, prosecutors did not provide a reason for the
recent shift.
Regardless, convictions for the more serious charges faced by
Manning could still carry a sentence of life in prison.
Manning’s defense team attempted to block testimony from
witnesses linked to alleged damage caused by the release of the
leaked documents. Army Col. Denise Lind, overseeing the trial,
disagreed, and ruled that the prosecution will have the option to
call witnesses to provide both evidence and context of any
collateral damage caused by the document leaks.
Lind did say, however, that the testimony would be limited so as
to not have the trial “devolve into many trials regarding
international politics in many regions of the world.”
Both activists and journalists that have been following
Manning’s pretrial proceedings have accused the US military of
undermining the legal process by preventing access.
“The culture of extreme secrecy that has defined both the
Bush and Obama presidencies does a disservice to our democratic
society. By unnecessarily cloaking these proceedings from public
view or scrutiny, the government is undermining the most basic
principles of transparency and freedom of the press, both of which
are vital components of the democratic and judicial process,”
said journalist Jeremy Scahill, national security correspondent for
The Nation.
This article originally appeared on : RT