Home Blog Page 6

The CJA calls on Prime Minister Plenković to stop attacking journalists

0

The Croatian Journalists’ Association (CJA) calls on Prime Minister Andrej Plenković to refrain from constantly calling out journalists who – in the public interest – report on government affairs led by Plenković himself.

The Prime Minister has repeatedly accused journalists of leaking classified information, accused them of being corrupt, of publishing private correspondence between the appointed Chief State Attorney Ivan Turudić and former State Secretary Josipa Rimac for profit and “clicks”, and claimed that there is actually no public interest in publishing such information.

Similar rhetoric is employed by the Prime Minister when commenting on publications related to investigations by the EPPO, some branches of which have reached the Ministry of Culture and Media. He mentions “privileged journalists”, singles out a “handful of privileged journalists”, and accuses them of spinning.

By accusing journalists of corruption and publishing for the sake of “clicks”, the Prime Minister puts a target on journalists and exposes them to potential attacks. At the same time, unfounded accusations are made, which politicians, especially the highest state officials such as the Prime Minister, should avoid.

Prime Minister Plenković is not and cannot be the chief editor of Croatian media. The role of journalists and the media is to question individuals in positions of power and to point out irregularities in the system because that’s how they uphold democracy and hold those elected to public office accountable to the public.

Although the Prime Minister, through attempts to introduce the “Lex AP” and the appointment of the Chief State Attorney, continues with his autocratic capture of institutions that should oversee the authorities and be independent from them, he cannot prohibit journalists from doing their job in accordance with internationally accepted professional standards and democratic values, which they protect and promote in doing so.

For the Executive Board of the Croatian Journalists’ Association:

Hrvoje Zovko, President of the CJA

Chiara Bilić, Vice President of the CJA

Dragutin Hedl, Vice President of the CJA

The Anti-Slapp Directive was adopted in the European Parliament

0

At today’s plenary vote in the European Parliament, the Anti-SLAPP Directive was adopted, which sets minimum standards for protection against abusive litigation in the form of SLAPPs, or Strategic Lawsuits against Public Participation.

The Anti-SLAPP Coalition in Europe (CASE) welcomed the adoption of the Directive and clarifies that the onus now lies with member states to build on the foundations laid by the Anti-SLAPP Directive and draft effective national legislation that includes:

– A broad scope that covers both domestic SLAPP cases and claims governed by criminal procedural law or in administrative proceedings; Strong safeguards in terms of an early release mechanism to filter out SLAPPs; Safeguards in national damages legislation with special criteria, as well as imposing substantial fines on plaintiffs for using SLAPP to intimidate public supervisors; Non-legal instruments such as support mechanisms, judge/lawyer awareness and training, lawyer ethics, data collection and monitoring of SLAPPs – these instruments are detailed in the Commission’s Anti-SLAPP Recommendations.

CASE analyzed the three most important aspects of the final text of the Anti-SLAPP Directive. These are recommendations for transposition into national legislation: Early dismissal mechanism, Definition of transboundary border and Compensatory damages.

CASE will closely monitor transposition to ensure that these minimum standards are met across Europe and that legislation is drafted in line with the Commission’s Anti-SLAPP Recommendation and the Council of Europe Recommendation on SLAPPs. A positive vote in the plenary session is an important next step in the fight against SLAPPs, but more needs to be done at the member state level to introduce protections against SLAPPs.

Threats against Kallxo’s team in Skënderaj

0

Today, journalist Adelina Ahmeti and cameraman Jetmir Hoxha of Kallxo.com were threatened by an individual with initials M.H in the village of Skënderaj, Klina e Mesme.

The citizen obstructed the team while they were adressing the construction of a church in the village.

According to this media, this person not only hindered their team but also used abusive and threatening words toward them. This was then reported to Skënderaj Police Station.

“Walk away, I swear as long as I get home I will f*** your m***…I swear to God, it’s going to be a problem for you”, were the threats that M.H. had said to them.

The Association of Journalists of Kosovo is concerned regarding the threat towards Kallxo’s colleagues and urges the Kosovo Police to prioritize the investigation.

We condemn any form of threats against journalists, cameramen and other media workers, and call on the competent authorities to bring justice to all threats and attacks against the media.

Each attack on journalists and media is an attack on freedom of expression and democracy.

BHJA: Urgently suspend the ivestigation of journalists and reject the criminal charge by the Minister Adnan Delić

0

The Board of Directors of the BH Journalists Association (BHJA)  and the Helpline for Journalists send a public protest to Adnan Delic, Minister of Labor and Social Policy of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH), for attempting to criminalize journalists and the media who wrote about his intentions to illegally distribute public money to citizens’ associations. in this entity.

Minister Delić filed a criminal charges with the Cantonal Prosecutor’s Office in Sarajevo and asked the judicial and police institutions to investigate who provided the journalists of Hayat TV and the portal Slobodna Bosna and Istraga.ba with documents on the basis of which they wrote about an attempt to illegally and non-transparently divide 728,000 KM of budget funds. . Acting on the basis of Minister Delic’s report, the Prosecutor’s Office of Sarajevo Canton issued several orders to the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Sarajevo Canton, whose officials asked Hayat TV to provide them with information about the journalists who wrote the aforementioned text, so that they could “be heard as witnesses”.

Filing criminal charges against journalists and the media represents a serious attack on freedom of expression and freedom of the media, as well as an attempt to deprive journalists of their right to critically question the decisions of public officials and use information obtained from unnamed sources. The BHJA Steering Committee reminds Minister Delic that, assuming public office, he voluntarily agreed to public criticism of the way he performs his duties and makes decisions, which is why it is completely unbelievable that he reacts to media content that he does not like with a criminal report!? BHJA, therefore, remind him that in democratic societies and free political debate, ministers mostly “defend themselves” with arguments and evidence, and not by persecuting journalists or by criminalizing them with the aim of deceiving the public about real facts and ways of disposing of budget funds.

The decision of the KS Prosecutor’s Office to uncritically accept the criminal complaint of Minister Delic and resort to legal actions contrary to the standards of the Council of Europe on the protection of freedom of expression and the application of Article 10 of the European Convention on the Protection of Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms is particularly surprising. The order on the collection of data on Hayat TV journalists and their eventual questioning as witnesses also contradicts the provisions of Article 96 of the Law on Criminal Procedure of the FBiH, which prohibits the questioning of journalists on the circumstance of revealing the source of information.

The Management Board of BHJA calls on the KS Prosecutor’s Office to immediately suspend all investigative actions against Hayat TV journalists as well as the Slobodna Bosna and Istraga.ba portals, to withdraw the order on the questioning of journalists as witnesses and to dismiss Delić’s criminal complaint in its entirety as unfounded. At the same time, the Board of BH Journalists gives full support to the journalists of Slobodna Bosna, Hayat TV and the Istraga.ba portal in order to protect their sources, and encourages them to refuse to provide the police with any data or documents that may violate the confidentiality and integrity of information sources, as well as trust. between information sources and these three media.

Board of Directors of BH Journalists

PHOTO: Harun Muminović

“Day X” hearing concludes with no immediate decision, leaving Julian Assange’s fate hanging in the balance

0
photo: IJAS

A UK High Court hearing to determine whether Julian Assange will be allowed a final appeal against his extradition to the United States concluded with no immediate decision, leaving the fate of the WikiLeaks publisher hanging in the balance. With Assange too unwell to attend the hearing himself, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) reiterates its calls for his urgent release.

The two-day hearing on 20 and 21 February was presided over by judges Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Johnson, who heard Assange’s defence team argue why the extradition should be blocked, and lawyers for the US government present their arguments in response. The hearing concluded with the judges reserving their decision; they gave no indication of when it might come, other than setting some internal deadlines for lawyers to provide additional information – the last of which was 4 March.

For the first time since January 2021, Assange was granted permission to attend the hearing in person or to connect from Belmarsh Prison via video link, but his lawyers said he was too unwell to do either. RSF remains concerned for Assange’s health following our last visit to him in Belmarsh on 16 January, during which he was suffering from a respiratory illness and had broken a rib from excessive coughing.

 

“We heard nothing new from the US government during this hearing – they simply doubled down on their long-standing arguments that this case is not about journalism and that Assange would be given a fair trial in the United States. But this case very much is about journalism and press freedom, and with no First Amendment protection and no public interest defence in the Espionage Act, Assange cannot receive a fair trial. While we still hope for some form of justice to be delivered in the UK, we continue our call on the US government to find a political solution to bring the case to a close and allow for Assange’s release without further delay”, said Rebecca Vincent, Director of Campaigns.

Assange’s defence lawyers presented their final grounds for appeal, including their argument that the political nature of Assange’s actions mean a political offence exemption should apply and present a legal bar to his extradition. They argued that his prosecution would represent a grave violation of freedom of speech, and that he would not be given a fair trial in the United States. They pointed to alarming reports of CIA officials planning Assange’s possible rendition or assassination, and expressed serious concern that, post extradition, the charges against Assange could be modified to allow for the possibility of the death penalty.

The US government responded by repeating its longstanding arguments about the case, emphasising that the bulk nature of the disclosures and the publication of names of implicated individuals meant that Assange’s actions went beyond the ordinary practices of journalism. They held him responsible for the unredacted dataset ending up in the public domain, even though other parties published it before WikiLeaks following a password disclosure by one of the media partners WikiLeaks worked with. They also attempted to dispute the defence’s argument that Assange, as a foreign national, would not be given First Amendment protections, despite the US prosecutor himself having said this could be the case.

RSF representatives attended the hearing in court, having been properly accredited as NGO observers for the first time in four years of monitoring the extradition proceedings. In the main courtroom, RSF and other observers were able to fully follow proceedings; however, journalists in an overflow courtroom experienced extensive difficulties in doing their jobs due to connection issues to the live feed. The court resolved these problems on the second day of the hearing. Unlike previous hearings, remote access was only granted to journalists and observers physically present in England and Wales, leaving others disappointed – particularly in the US and Australia, where journalists’ union the MEAA engaged in advocacy efforts to attempt to resolve the issue for its members.

The UK is ranked 26th, and the US is ranked 45th out of 180 countries in RSF’s 2023 World Press Freedom Index.

Cource: RSF

Rudić: We are witnessing a deliberate and brutal suppression of media freedoms and freedom of speech in BiH

0

Borka Rudić, general secretary of the BH Journalists Association (BHJA), speaks about the pressure on all those who think freely, who, since the passing of the “law on foreign agents”, which criminalizes defamation, are threatened with fines of up to 3,000 euros and on the basis of which 45 reports have been filed in a few months.

Since defamation became a criminal offense in Republika Srpska four and a half months ago, 44 reports have been filed for that offense and one for “exposing personal and family circumstances”. Among the defendants are 32 citizens and five journalists, so we can already talk about legal pressure on all free-thinking people, says Borka Rudić, general secretary of the BHJA, in an interview with Cenzolovka. The journalist and professor of philosophy and sociology says that in practice this means – “a priori censorship” in order to avoid criminal prosecution for “defamation”.

She says that the law “on the special register and publicity of the work of non-profit organizations”, which is colloquially called the “law on foreign agents”, is part of the “package” of political measures initiated by the President of Republika Srpska Milorad Dodik.

In 2023, the BHJA registered 87 cases of violations of media freedom and safety of journalists. Only 10 were solved.

Cenzolovka: From August 2023, after the decision of the Assembly of the Republic of Srpska, defamation is a criminal offense, for which a fine of around 3,000 euros can be obtained. Journalists and non-governmental organizations say the aim of this law is to limit open and critical debate on topics of public interest. You pointed out that five defamation cases have been filed against journalists since then. What kind of cases are we talking about?

Rudić: We still don’t have information about who is behind the large number of criminal charges in the Republika Srpska or who has been sued, because the district prosecutor’s offices have not shared that information with us. For now, we know the number of applications – 45, of which 44 are for defamation and one application for “presenting personal and family circumstances”. Most of the defendants are citizens – 32, followed by five journalists, two politicians and five unknown persons.

We only received summary data from the District Prosecutor’s Office in Banja Luka, so I don’t know how many journalists, civil society activists or people from other professions there are.

If you’re going to write about the enrichment of a son whose mother is in public office, or research public works involving the president’s godfather, you need to think ahead about how you’re going to do it without facing criminal charges.

None of these criminal charges have yet been confirmed or indicted. In general, this is a really large number of criminal charges in four and a half months. We can already talk about legal pressure on all free-thinking people – from citizens, who are currently the most affected by criminal proceedings because of their expressed opinions, to journalists and civil society activists. The outlines of the legal framework and institutional mechanisms for silencing any criticism, limiting public debate on topics of concern to citizens and violating the right to freedom of speech are clearly visible.

Now anyone can file a criminal complaint, for political, personal and even the most down-to-earth malicious reasons. The Prosecutor’s Office will have to receive that application, process it and spend human and material resources for something that is unthinkable in a democratic world – and that is conducting criminal proceedings because of someone’s opinion, criticism, media text, comment or invasion of privacy for the sake of public interest.

Cezolovka: What consequences do defamation lawsuits have on journalism? But also on citizens’ access to information of public importance?

Rudić: Although the application of the law is still only at the level of criminal charges, the law shows negative consequences and the destruction of the profession, which is immanent in criticism of public officials, questioning the way they perform public functions and investigating possible abuse of public powers for personal interests.

For example, if you intend to write about the son whose mother is in public office getting rich, or getting private companies owned by the director of a public hospital, or researching public works in which the president’s godfather is involved, you must think in advance how you will write about these topics, and don’t face criminal charges. It is a priori censorship or self-censorship in order to avoid criminal prosecution! It’s really not easy to work under such circumstances.

Here, I do not want to underestimate the common sense and professional competence of the holders of judicial positions, nor do I doubt that in the spirit of the law, the Constitution and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, they will evaluate and then reject or accept criminal defamation complaints. However, it will not be easy for them, given the broad provisions of the law and the motives behind its adoption.

Those motives are, unequivocally, the decades-long frustration with the media of the current president of the RS and his final attempt to limit, if not completely stop, the work of a number of free media and journalists in the Republic of Srpska, but also in the whole of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In Sarajevo Canton, there is a proposal to punish “fake news”, which would allegedly include large fines for citizens and legal entities, including the media

Cenzolovka: Numerous media outlets in the RS are registered as non-governmental organizations. What will be the consequences of the adoption of this law for them?

Rudić: This law is also part of the “package” of political measures initiated by the President of Republika Srpska through the misuse of public institutions of legislative and executive power. There are no legal gaps to speak of the need to pass a special law on the control of the work of NGOs or the creation of their register.

The Republika Srpska, like other parts of the country, has clear legal regulations in the area of NGO registration, tax payment, doing business through banks, submitting annual financial reports, respecting the rights of employees, reporting personal income of citizens and paying taxes, etc.

The aforementioned laws allow everyone from different sectors and public institutions to check what NGOs are doing, even on a daily basis. So, it is clear that this law is being passed for the purpose of the targeted suppression of freedoms within the civil sector, and to stop the work of human rights NGOs and the media.

Again, common sense was defeated by the unreasonable power of the presidential position and Milorad Dodik’s obsession with a number of media and NGOs in the RS, whose work the president would ban as soon as tomorrow.

DIPLOMATIC TRADE IN BIH WILL SWALLOW MEDIA FREEDOMS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

Cenzolovka: Do the European Union and other international organizations understand the consequences of such a law?

Rudić: I am not enthusiastic about their principles and efficiency. On the contrary! They are (as) publicly opposed to rigid interventions in the legal framework for media and civil society because media freedom is one of the 14 priorities for EU integration.

On the other hand, “diplomatic trade” has been established here with the ruling structures in both BH entities and at the level of state institutions. That trade, I’m afraid, will swallow media freedoms and human rights, and that for “little money”.

Here is an illustrative example: last year, a new Law on Free Access to Information was adopted at the state level. Previously, the draft law was negatively evaluated by the EU and the BH Ombudsman Institution, since it contained solutions that reduce the rights defined in the old law. The civil sector sent as many as 200 comments and amendments, but the Ministry of Justice of Bosnia and Herzegovina did not accept any of them!

Nevertheless, the law was adopted without any changes to the draft as part of the “package of European laws” that BiH must accept on the way to EU integration. And with the consent of the EU in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I am afraid that this will be the case with all the laws that are rapidly being passed in different parts of the country with the political slogan “the European path of BiH has no alternative”! And what will happen with media freedom and human rights…

Cenzolovka: There is a proposal in Sarajevo Canton to punish “fake news”, which would allegedly include large fines for citizens and legal entities, including the media. There are fears that this regulation, if adopted, would cause a chain reaction. What is problematic about this regulation?

Rudić: The fundamental problem is that this law declares the Internet a “public place” as if it were a public space – that is, a physical, clearly limited public space within which violations take place and are sanctioned. Also, it is very difficult, even completely impossible at the level of one canton to solve the problem with fake news, hate speech or serious security threats in the practically unlimited online sphere, which is also desired by this law.

The problem is that the police are given great powers and measures to limit freedom of expression, without providing for the assessment of public interest, as well as the implementation of reasonable measures and balance in any type of restriction of the right to freedom of expression and opinion.

We can talk about legal pressure on all free-thinking people – from citizens, who are currently the most affected by criminal proceedings because of their expressed opinions, to journalists and civil society activists.

And finally, it is also problematic that the state of BiH has criminal legislation that treats many of the issues listed in the draft of this misdemeanor law.

Of course, the possibility of “spillover” of the same or similar legal solutions to other cantons is no less dangerous.

Some have already done it before, such as the Una-Sana Canton, and there were similar initiatives in the Parliament of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. I was a member of the working group that discussed the draft law in several sessions, we disagreed on many issues. Now the proposer of the law is on the move – the Sarajevo Canton Government, and later the Assembly.

I sincerely hope that the law will not be submitted to the parliamentary procedures before all articles that include the media and social networks, as well as misdemeanor measures and procedures against hate speech and fake news are omitted from it.

ONLY ONE IN FOUR ATTACKERS OF JOURNALISTS WERE PUNISHED

Cenzolovka: Safejournalists recorded an increased number of attacks on journalists in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In particular, there were attacks in Banja Luka due to the LGBT parade in Mostar, when the owner of Hercegovina.info Marija Ćosić had all her car tires punctured twice, as well as the attack in Brčko on the owner of the Times.ba portal, Mirza Dervišević. How do these attacks affect the work of journalists?

Rudić: In the helpline for journalists, we registered 87 different cases of violations of media freedom and safety of journalists during 2023, which is 10.12 percent more than in 2022. The largest number (21) refers to political pressure, verbal threats (17), six are physical attacks, seven death threats, eight hate speech, etc.

The problem is the high level of impunity and the slowness in the investigation of attacks, including the cases you mentioned. Only 10 cases reported in 2023 were resolved in that year before the courts or other competent institutions. In general, among journalists and the media, there is a great distrust in the work of the judiciary, since the success rate in punishing those who attack journalists is only 25.4 percent.

This is unacceptable, and we in BH journalists are talking about the inaccessibility of justice for journalists. This has a discouraging effect on all journalists and the media, especially younger colleagues. If we add to this a large number of criminal charges in Republika Srpska, then we are truly witnessing a deliberate and brutal suppression of media freedom and freedom of speech in BiH. And that in front of the eyes of the European institutions in Bosnia and Herzegovina and after the country received candidate status.

Source: Cenzolovka, BH novinari

Negotiations on the collective agreement at Hansa Media began

0
Source: SNH

In one of the largest media companies in Croatia – HANZA MEDIA – negotiations on the Collective Agreement have begun. The Trade Union of Croatian Journalists (TUCJ) and the Trade Union of Graphic and Media Workers are advocating for improvements in material and labor conditions. At the negotiating meeting of the employer and union negotiating committees at HANZA MEDIA, held on February 20, 2024, the union negotiating committee proposed a negotiation protocol and welcomed the strengthening of social dialogue as an important step for protecting labor and professional rights in this media company, but also as a positive indicator of changes in the media sector, SNH stated.

In all European Union member states, as stipulated by the European Directive on Adequate European Wages, 80 percent of workers should be covered by collective agreements, with each country required to adopt an action plan to meet this quota. The actual situation is far from this goal, as in 19 out of the 27 countries, this is not the case. Among the countries where the coverage of workers by collective agreements is lower than this threshold is Croatia, where collective agreements cover about 55 percent of workers. In the media sector, this statistic is even worse, as new collective agreements are being negotiated in public media services, while there is still a lack of a positive environment for quality social dialogue in private media. By emphasizing the priority of strengthening job protection through collective agreements for the EU, collective bargaining has become a politically stable and inclusive element of economic development.

A collective agreement is a legal document agreed upon between the employer and the union. It regulates issues related to employment relationships – working hours, duration of daily, weekly, and annual leave, salary levels, and salary supplements, as well as issues related to employment such as health and safety protection at work, organization of workers’ meetings, protection of union representatives, etc. Unlike the Work Rules, which the employer unilaterally adopts and can change despite opposition from worker representatives in a very short time, workers through collective bargaining via unions have the right to equal dialogue.

The start of negotiations at HANZA MEDIA is an indicator of changes in the media sector, the strengthening of quality and constructive social dialogue, and we believe it is just the beginning of better protection of the labor and professional rights of journalists and media workers in Croatia.

Slovakia: impunity for Jan Kuciak’s murder continues

0

The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and International Federation of Journalists (IFJ)  reiterate their call for justice for the murder, six years ago, of investigative reporter Ján Kuciak and his fiancee Martina Kušnírová.

Ján Kuciak and Martina Kušnírová were shot and killed at their home on 21 February 2018. Kuciak had regularly reported on cases of corruption for online news website Aktuality.sk. His investigative reporting included articles on alleged tax fraud committed by prominent members of the business community, with suggested links to SMER party as well as organised crime groups.

Six years on, Kuciak’s and Kušnírová’s families are still struggling for justice.

The hitmen who committed the murder have been brought to justice and sentenced to long prison terms. However, the alleged mastermind of the murder, businessman Marian Kočner, continues to evade justice.

“This culture of impunity and the lack of concrete measures to re-establish a genuine system of press freedom in Slovakia are the result of criminal behaviour by the government in power, which is characterised by hostile rhetoric from senior politicians, often at the root of despicable smear campaigns,” said EFJ President Maja Sever. “This must stop!”

We demand Slovak authorities to take action to protect journalists and the right of citizens to access information:

  • it is time to put an end to impunity for the murderers of journalists;
  • it is time to demand that politicians respect journalists;
  • it is time to guarantee the independence of the management of public television RTVS and to set up a stable and independent funding for public service media;
  • it is time to adopt rules for the fair and transparent distribution of state advertising;
  • it is time to adopt a law prohibiting politicians from owning media;
  • it is time to decriminalize defamation.

Much remains to be done to establish a regime of genuine press freedom in Slovakia.

Source: EFJ

IJAS, JAS and UJS: DO NOT EXTRADITE ASSANGE

0
photo: IJAS

The Independent Journalists Association of Serbia (IJAS), the Journalists Association of Serbia (JAS) and the Union of Journalists of Serbia (UJS) held a rally today in front of the House of Journalists in Belgrade in support of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange shortly before the London court’s decision on his extradition to the United States of America (USA).

The organizers of the meeting said that the decision of the Royal Court of Justice to extradite Julian Assange to the USA would mean a ban on freedom of speech and investigative journalism.

Kristina Kovac Nastasic from JAS addressed the crowd on their behalf. She said that journalism is a public good because every society and every citizen benefits from professional journalism.

“By pointing out abuses, violations of the law, corruption, evil and injustice, often far from the eyes of the public, journalism contributes to people’s freedom and democracy. That’s why journalism is a public good”, said Kovac Nastasic.

She stated that if the court decide to extradite Assange, it would have tragic consequences for him because he could be sentenced to death. Also, journalism as a profession would be irreversibly threatened.

“The decision of the Government of Great Britain to extradite Assange will stand as a permanent threat to every investigative journalist, every fighter against dirty projects, violence and crimes, whether behind them are states, tycoons, interest groups or individuals. Our message to the Royal Court of Justice in London is: DON’T EXTRADIT ASSANGE”, said Kovac Nastasic.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will appear in London’s High Court today in what is likely to be his last attempt to avoid extradition to the US, which accuses him of espionage.

Assange is accused, along with whistleblower and former US military analyst Chelsea Manning, of conspiring by hacking into a Pentagon computer and releasing secret diplomatic cables and military files.

The WikiLeaks revelations exposed details of US activities in Iraq and Afghanistan and included video footage of a helicopter attack by US forces that killed 11 people, including two Reuters journalists.

Assange’s lawyers say that if he is found guilty, he could be sentenced to up to 175 years in prison.