Obama’s Drone Wars killing civilians, US diplomats doubling up as spies, appalling conditions in Guantanamo prisons, Saudi Arabia urging US to bomb Iran, the men behind Purulia arms drops in India, Rajiv Gandhi’s unhealthy interest in arms deals, cash-for-votes scam that saved the Congress government in 2008…….the list could go on…….these are some of the greatest stories on India and around the world and all had one thing in common, the source. The diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks.

The United Nations’ Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (also known as the UN panel), part of the UN Office of the Commission on Human Rights, head-quartered in Geneva has ruled in favour of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, “On 4 December 2015, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) adopted Opinion No. 54/2015, in which it considered that Mr. Julian Assange was arbitrarily detained by the Governments of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In that opinion, the Working Group recognized that Mr. Assange is entitled to his freedom of movement and to compensation. The application was filed with the Working Group in September 2014. The Opinion 54/2015 was sent to the Governments of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland on 22 January 2016 in accordance with the Working Group’s Methods of Work.” Governments of UK and Sweden and United Kingdom got two weeks to challenge the ruling. The UN panel released its ruling on 5^th February via press conference. The detailed briefing can be found here.

Since Mr Assange is from Australia, one of the working group members from Australia recused herself from the case, another member, from Ukraine gave a dissenting opinion. The UN panel’s verdict was 3:1 in favour of Assange. The panel pointed out Assange had been detained for 10 days in an undisclosed location, then house-arrested for 500 days after which Assange has been confined to the Equadorian embassy. It amounted to “deprivation of liberty”. The panel recommended Governments of UK and Sweden to move in the direction to comply with accepted international laws of detention, ensure freedom of movement to Assange and also comply with his right to compensation for the period of arbitrary detention.

The panel has ruled, actions of the governments of UK and Sweden as “Articles 9 and 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and and Articles 7, 9(1) 9(3), 9(4), 10 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.” The panel has been scathing on the conduct of Swedish prosecution and the pace of its investigation.

The same UN Panel had earlier ruled in favour of Aung San Suu Kyi (the Burmese leader), Anwar Ibrahim (Malaysian opposition leader) and Chinese artist Ai Weiwei.

Predictably, the UK and Swedish governments have rejected the UN Panel ruling, calling Assange’s condition self-inflicted and not detention and that Assange has violated UK’s bail conditions by walking into the Equadorian embassy and confining himself there. The panel’s press briefing had already anticipated United Kingdom and Sweden’s stance and given defence of its ruling that in five years Swedish prosecution failed to file charges against Assange and refused to interrogate Assange in the Equadorian embassy while they interviewed five others in the same period. The panel upheld Assange’s fear that his extradition to Sweden could lead to his further extradition to US where he would be tried under the draconian terror laws because of the WikiLeaks work.

The UN panel ruling has been hailed by transparency activists, journalists and anti-war campaigners. However many establishment media houses, mainstream media houses and even some liberal publications like the Guardian, have, criticized the UN panel decision calling it a stretch, an attention-seeking ruling. Jonathan Cook has called out Guardian and film maker Alex Gibney for their inability to acknowledge the might of US and allies being rallied against Assange and the trumped up nature of the case against him (especially since the first Swedish prosecutor had thrown it out). Also on the real danger of Assange’s extradition to US if he ever gets arrested by Swedish authorities.

Melinda Taylor, member of Assange’s legal team, broke it down on Russia Today’s show Going Underground:

1. Since UK and Sweden are signatories to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the UN panel decision is legally binding.

2. The UN panel is treating Assange’s refuge’ in the Equadorian embassy in London as arbitrary detention because neither UK nor Sweden are willing to give him any guarantee that he would not be extradited to the United States.

Britain’s foreign secretary Phillip Hammond called the UN panel ruling “frankly ridiculous”. This has been called out by former British diplomat Craig Murray that the panel consisted of eminent international lawyers and by rejecting the findings, Britain has put itself in the pretty company of Egypt and Uzbekistan.

Assange wants his passport back and the right to safe passage to Equador, which has granted him asylum. Going by the British and Swedish government reaction, that is not happening anytime soon.

We have not seen the last of this case. And this case is important considering Wikileaks’ impact on transparency, journalism.

Key dates of the case below:

August 20, 2010: Swedish prosecutor issues arrest warrant for Mr. Assange based on one woman’s allegation of rape and another woman’s allegation of molestation.

August 21, 2010: Arrest warrant is withdrawn. Prosecutor Eva Finne says there appears to be insufficient evidence for allegation of rape.

September 1, 2010: Sweden’s director of prosecutions, Marianne Ny, reopens rape investigation.

September 27, 2010: Mr. Assange leaves Sweden for Britain.

December 8, 2010: Mr. Assange surrenders to police in London and is detained pending extradition hearing.

February 24, 2011: District court in Britain rules Mr. Assange should be extradited to Sweden.

June 19, 2012: Mr. Assange enters Ecuadorean embassy in central London, seeking asylum. Police set up round-the-clock guard to arrest him if he steps outside.

September 2014: Mr. Assange’s lawyers submit a complaint against Sweden and Britain to the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention claiming his situation in the embassy amounts to illegal detention.

October 12, 2015: Metropolitan Police end their 24-hour guard outside the Ecuadorean embassy but say they will use overt and covert means to track and arrest Mr. Assange if he leaves. It ends a three-year police operation which is estimated to have cost more than £12 million ($17 million).

February 5, 2016: Mr. Assange claims “total vindication” as the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention finds that he has been unlawfully detained and recommends he be immediately freed and given compensation. Britain and Sweden say the finding will have no impact on their policy. British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond calls the finding “frankly ridiculous”.

A detailed timeline of the case is here.