[bbatha]

Snowden had already exfiltrated the documents by the time he coordinated with journalists to publish them. Assange allegedly instructed Manning on how to exfiltrate the documents and directed Manning’s exfiltration process. Publishing is protected by the first amendment, stealing classified documents is not and ergo conspiracy to steal documents is not.

[benologist]

Assange broke US laws that he was never subject to, as an Australian living in Europe.

[threeseed]

That's not how the entire fabric of international law works though.

Citizenship and postal address are irrelevant. If you break the law in another country and there is an extradition treaty then you will face the consequences.

[prepend]

So if I buy something from a Saudi Arabian e-commerce site am I at risk for extradition from Ireland to Saudi Arabia for the capital offense of being gay?

Clearly I was gay while doing stuff online on a Saudi Arabian server.

[colechristensen]

No.

Extradition is covered by a patchwork of treaties and laws most of which involve some kind of human judgement as well.

One core concept of extradition is the crime has to be, at least in broad strokes, illegal in both jurisdictions.

The crime in question also has to have some reasonable argument of jurisdiction for the requesting state. You might have been gay while buying things from an SA company, but you weren't doing anything in an interaction with SA that had anything to do with being gay. (The first dual criminality concept protects you way before having to think about this). It is also often the case that countries are reluctant or outright refuse to extradite their own citizens and choose to try them in court locally.

Assange wouldn't be protected by either of these. Conspiring to take classified military secrets with a member of the military in question would be illegal everywhere. As would participating in the taking and the following distribution.

The legal questions for Assange are "did he do those things, guiding, requesting, and helping Manning acquire and send the classified information?" "Do the first amendment protections of free speech and free press cover WikiLeaks model?" and "Would Assange receive a fair trial and just punishment if extradited?"

[foldr]

No, you couldn't be extradited from Ireland for being gay because it's not illegal to be gay in Ireland. It has to be a crime in both countries.

But in general, questions of jurisdiction are complicated. They're settled by courts, not by what people say on the internet.

[prepend]

If it was illegal in both countries, I wouldn’t need to be extradited since I was gay in Ireland too.

Assange isn’t being accused of things that are criminal in the UK.

[foldr]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_criminality

Whether or not the requirement is met in Assange's case is to be decided by the court. There are certainly laws in the UK that prohibit hacking. Anyway, you are wrong in general about how extradition works. People are often, for example, extradited on murder charges.

[oh_sigh]

If you really want to follow this thread, it isn't illegal to be gay in Saudi Arabia, it is only illegal to commit homosexual acts.

[toomanybeersies]

Specifically, for your case, I'd say no [1]

> The Justice Minister has, however, told the Dáil that he won’t extradite anyone who may be put to death for their crime.

More generally, you're at risk of extradition if the alleged crime is also a crime in the country you reside in [2].

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_criminality

[ABeeSea]

If the Irish government has an extradition treaty with SA covering that crime and the Irish government has decided to extradite you, then yes. However, no such treaty exists and the Irish government would never do it.

The key with extradition is that it has more to do with diplomacy, geopolitics, and sovereignty than anything else.

[dragonwriter]

> So if I buy something from a Saudi Arabian e-commerce site am I at risk for extradition from Ireland to Saudi Arabia for the capital offense of being gay?

Probably not, because that's not within the scope of what Ireland would be willing to extradite for.

But that's a question of Saudi Arabia’s practical ability to bring you to trial, not one of whether or not any law they have would apply to you on principle.

[rebuilder]

That seems a bit simplistic. There's a wide range of crimes you can commit on-line without ever entering the jurisdiction of the victims.

[toomanybeersies]

Yes, just ask Kim Dotcom, who has also tried to jump on the "persecuted internet freedom fighter" bandwagon.

[dragonwriter]

> Assange broke US laws that he was never subject to, as an Australian living in Europe.

That's not how laws work. Laws are limited in territorial applicability only to the extent that the sovereign adopting them so limit them, and basically no government would fail to hold foreign coconspirators in a crime occuring within their domestic jurisdiction immune to prosecution (some might not have the practical means to bring such an actor to justice, and some might not choose to apply them in most cases as a matter of policy priorities, but that's a different issue.)

[boomboomsubban]

Manning knew how to extract the documents already, Assange attempted to help her do it more anonymously. Trying to protect your source is the duty of the press.

[Fjolsvith]

"Assange attempted to help her"

Aiding and abetting.