Two somewhat related pieces of recent UK news: > How a proposed secrecy law would recast journalism as spying[1] (20/07/21, Guardian) > The Home Office now wa

Two somewhat related pieces of recent UK news: > How a proposed secrecy law would recast journalism as spying[1] (20/07/21, Guardian) > The Home Office now wants harder and more extensive secrecy laws that would have the effect of deterring sources, editors and reporters, making them potentially subject to uncontrolled official bans not approved by a court, and punished much more severely if they do not comply. In noisy political times, a government consultation issued two months ago has had worryingly little attention. Although portrayed as countering hostile activity by state actors, the new laws would, if passed, ensnare journalists and sources whose job is reporting “unauthorised disclosures” that are in the public interest. > Endorsed by the home secretary, Priti Patel, the consultation argues that press disclosures can be worse than spying, because the work of a foreign spy “will often only be to the benefit of a single state or actor”. > Calling for parliament to consider “increased maximum sentences”, the Home Office claims that there is now not necessarily a “distinction in severity between espionage and the most serious unauthorised disclosures”, including “onward disclosure” in the press. Journalism could even create “far more serious damage” than a spy. Yet the 66-page document does not mention “journalism” once, and refers only to “onward disclosure … without authorisation”. ----- > Priti Patel is urged to spare a billionaire dubbed 'Britain's Bill Gates' from a 'grotesque and unjust' extradition to US[2] (25/7/21, Mail Online) Interesting for the plea made by Conservative ex-cabinet-minister David Davis on behalf of the beset billionaire, in terms which (though he would never allow it) could just as well be applied to Assange: > America has a ferocious legal system with a 97 per cent conviction rate, where prosecutors, not judges, set the sentences. Defendants, too, are subjected to coercive plea bargaining. For example, people are encouraged to admit an offence and get a lesser jail sentence rather than continue to plead innocence and, if convicted, get a much longer term. and later: > He ended up in solitary confinement for 23 hours a day in a Pennsylvania penitentiary, without a clock and thus unable to know what time of day or night it was. > He and his co-charged were treated like criminals long before any trial began – placed in chains, frog-marched and strip-searched. > It is now up to the Home Secretary to decide whether Dr Lynch should stay in this country or be sent to a US cell. > I, and many others, urge Priti Patel not to submit to this grotesque and unjust process. She must wait for the outcome of a separate High Court trial examining the fraud allegations against Dr Lynch. I'd love to see just one member of the British Government stand up for Assange like that, but I guessing he is lacking the £8B collateral of Dr. Lynch. 1: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/20/proposed-secrecy-law-journalism-spying-home-office-public-interest-whistleblowing https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/20/propos... 2: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9822229/Priti-Patel-urged-spare-billionaire-dubbed-Britains-Bill-Gates-extradition-US.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9822229/Priti-Patel...