 Welcome to CN Live, season five, episode seven, Assange and Ecuador, the backstory. I'm Joe Laurier, the editor-in-chief of Consortium News. And I'm Elizabeth Boss. The tortured story of imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange has involved four countries, the United States principally, Britain, Sweden and Ecuador. Former UN special rapporteur on torture Nils Meltzer accused these countries of ganging up on Assange to cause him to suffer from psychological torture. Ecuador's role in the Assange persecution from the granting of asylum to his arrest and much in between often does not get the attention that it deserves. Today, CN Live is in Quito, the Ecuadorian capital, to explore in-depth Ecuador's part in this story. Our guest today is Carlos Poveda, who has served as Assange's lawyer in this country. We're also joined by Ecuadorian journalist Jose Rivera, who has covered the Assange case here. Jose will also serve as our translator today. Carlos, welcome to CN Live. When Julian Assange lost his appeal at the U.K. Supreme Court against extradition to Sweden, he made his way to the Ecuador embassy in London. He feared that Sweden would extradite him to the U.S. After a careful process, the then President Rafael Correa granted Assange asylum. Carlos, why did Ecuador decide to grant asylum? And what price did Ecuador pay with the United States for doing that? Information that this was the beginning of an investigation that would originate a request for extradition to the United States. And that Sweden was already in agreement with the United States so that once it started and already learned or captured Assange was extradited to the United States. In front of this, the President Correa, once Julian enters the embassy in London, analyzes all the aspects and all the fears that there was about the Swedish investigation. And how information was given about the fear of extradition or the political or diplomatic asylum to Julian Assange. The cost at the beginning was quite high because in the international community what was manifesting was that he was giving asylum to a person for a common crime of rape that was not anything political or diplomatic. In Ecuador there were rejections towards asylum but, nevertheless, the autonomous decision of the government gave it up. And this was a first step to prevent his integrity and his life because if the issue of the asylum had not occurred, Assange would have suddenly been judged in the United States. But, in addition, in contrast to this position, there was also the support of certain groups and few states, highlighting the courage that the President Correa had to face very powerful states, being such a small country as Ecuador. He showed that he respected the rights of a human rights journalist and protected it internationally from a small state towards very strong states like the United States, Great Britain and Sweden. The message was also clear that despite being a small state, some did not even place it in the territorial space but that we gave more dignity and respect to human rights. For the first six years Assange continued working from the embassy but during that time we later learned from a Spanish court case that the CIA had contracted with the Spanish firm UC Global to spy on Assange, including on privileged conversations with his lawyers. Now Assange sued Ecuador and you Carlos, you represented him. Tell us about the case and what were your arguments and what happened with the case? That's what Assange said in public declarations that Assange was a comfortable person in the embassy and that caused a lot of harm to Ecuador in relations with the United States and Great Britain. Once Moreno takes the presidency, the level of security in the embassy has changed. Increasing the cameras. Interposing in hidden microphones in specific places. Obviously we knew that around the embassy, and this from the time of President Correa, there were international intelligence agencies from Great Britain and the United States that rented departments to spy, to listen, to watch for 24 hours. But then we realized that it was not only an external espionage, but also an internal and that it was being used by the security company that hired Ecuador to supposedly give protection to Assange and that he was in charge of watching, filming and listening to everything Assange did inside the embassy and passing intelligence agencies, not only Americans, but also British. It is a very unilateral way of acting that had the embassy of the, excuse me, U.C. Global and that the embassy knew about these aspects, this first time. One of the first evidences that we had when we arrived at the embassy that they were espionaging was the reportage of the CNN with a reporter from Ecuador called Arturo Torres. He makes a reportage and evidence of which is the legal team of Julian Assange at the international level and we realized that there were even photographs of our passports. I speak to him in my case and the only way I had to know was that the security company when I entered in November 2016 had obtained a photocopy of my passport. This information came to the hands of this Mr. Torres in a reportage of the CNN and evidently that made us feel that there was a filtering of information to this type of journalism. Then it was evident and the contact in Spain, in Madrid, of a group of people who offered to sell information internally to Assange to any media, international, media that offered for 3 million euros and they exhibited folders with images, they exhibited folders with voices, with photographs and with documents. It was an offer of information. In this sense, the Spanish lawyers with Aito Martínez and Barta Sargarzón requested a follow-up of these people and the fiscal year of Madrid authorized. That is when we realized that there was this theft of information, this situation of extortion because they had contacted Chris Raphson, who is the director of Wikileaks, to sell this information and that it does not come out at the international level of what was happening inside the embassy. In one of these folders that exhibited these people who wanted to sell information, a photograph of a document appeared that in a trial that we had in Ecuador and which was transmitted via telematics from London, where Julian Assange, with his Spanish lawyer Aito Martínez, appeared in a photograph of a legal document and the only ones who could access this document were the diplomatic personnel of that time that was in the embassy. It is more, it is very paradoxical, a finger appeared, one of the diplomats in the despair of taking the photograph. That is to say that while there was a trial, they entered the interior of the room or the room where Julian was. They took photographs and sent that. That was also part of the information they wanted to sell. With that, it was shown that the lawyers were spying on us in the auditions, when that was very reserved. Then they also exhibited photographs inside the embassy and videos. Some of them were even spread worldwide. And in this investigation carried out by the Spanish administration, there was in the recording of this conversation with Chris Raphson and Aito Martínez where it was shown that the information they knew and knew the staff of the embassy in Ecuador. That is to say that they had knowledge of all this and that they precisely leaked the information and that this information was not only obtained by them, but also by the Department of Intelligence of the United States and Great Britain, which they also had to report. It is more, the president of USA Global, Mr. Morales, he has already been in contact with characters in the United States and that, in exchange for everything he had done, he also had security contracts in the United States, basically with characters who supported Donald Trump's campaign. Once we had all the information, and the government of Madrid did their job in the questioning of these people, we decided to present a report in Ecuador on espionage, acceptance and intimacy, because the delegation or the space of the Ecuadorian embassy is territory. Ecuadorian and we had to present the report in Ecuador. He told them that once we had the information of the Spanish tax, as far as these acts were committed in the Ecuadorian embassy, which is Ecuadorian territory, and because they were supposedly involved in diplomatic personnel, we decided to present a spionage report here in Ecuador, in the tax office. It lasted about three years and in the end the tax office archived the cause. He said that there was no cause, that Ecuador could spy internally, because it was a public space. The judicial authority accepted it and we are imposing that decision, which is totally unskilled, that is to say that it was a public space, because the state paid the rent of the embassy, they could spy and that any person did not have the right to intimacy. On the other hand, in Spain, the investigation continued and these extortioners were even captured, but later they were put under surveillance. While in Ecuador it was archived, in Spain the investigation continues and even Mike Pompeo was reported in the United States with this information because apparently they have a lot of excess of the espionage activity that was generated from the United States towards London and that this had a responsibility against Pompeo. Did your case go to the constitutional court of Ecuador? No, it was in the court at the time, it would be a criminal judicial unit. We have not yet taken part in the constitutional court, that space would be missing. It's not over yet, is that correct? The case is not over? No, they appealed and they are waiting for an answer, which will take years. Elizabeth. Sure, in the closing days of Assange's asylum in the embassy, was your team able to communicate with him? I spoke to Julián and Estela, now the wife of Julián, because they entered a brutal police officer without authorization. I want to point out that Assange is still in Ecuador. That is another reason we have in Ecuador, they wanted to cancel the nationality and until now we are defending the nationality and the nationality of the country. We are defending the nationality of the country. And until now we are defending it. It is still in Ecuador, it has not been removed from the nationality. So until 2019 we were able to talk, and there in the Bermash prison we have not been able to talk, but through intermediaries, which is the British defense and the Spanish defense. So to follow up on that, what is the status of his citizenship? Because I do understand that Ecuador tried, I thought that they had successfully stripped Assange of his citizenship. No, they still has not finished. It is still in court. Assange lawyers appealed the decision. All right, thank you. In terms of communicating with the Ecuadorian government, what was that like? How did that change when Korea's administration left office? It was very fluid. And also obviously due to the distance here in Ecuador, but it was direct, there was no problem. In Gresa Moreno and all communication was broken. Zero communication. There was barely an exchange of communications. From the chief lawyer Bartelsar Garzón, with the staff of the Ecuadorian prison, but it was a couple of communications and there was no more. There was already total communication with the embassy and just to listen and to see the way in which Moreno was pronounced. Until now it is pronounced in an inadequate and grotesque way against Assange. Until now it justifies the departure of him, who was an uncomfortable, rude character, who did not respect the norms of coexistence and a number of lies that maintain him. In that sense, there was a period of official cooperation of the Department of Justice of the United States to the Ecuadorian prison. In fact, there are many evidences that have the Ecuadorian prison. Few returned to the power of the mother of Julian Assange. Many of them are unknown to their parents. There was information in the sense that before they came to Ecuador, they passed through the United States because they put it in a diplomatic suitcase. One of the ambassadors of Moreno at that time. We made a request to the judge who ordered this in-cautation and we have not had an answer. Or they are in the tax office or they are not in the country. They have not indicated where they are. And obviously they are very sensitive evidences. The recording and the information material have it here in the tax office. It is one of the reasons that has not yet been closed. As far as there is still a supposed judicial cooperation with the United States. It must be noted that what the United States asked for the tax office gave, whatever it is, it will never return to the world. The documents that are in the archives of the Ecuadorian government are those public? Some of them. Most of the documents remain in the U.S. Because the FBI went inside the embassy in Assange's room and they took all documents and they sent to Ecuador or whatever they wanted. That is what it says. Carlos, there was a story in El País, this Spanish newspaper a few weeks ago that said Moreno wanted to get Assange a diplomatic passport so that he would be able to leave the embassy but that he was stopped by the head of Ecuadorian intelligence. This is what El País says. Is that what happened? And isn't it true that Britain would never have given him a diplomatic passport anyway? The United Kingdom, in this case the United Kingdom, gave him a diplomatic passport, that was the obligation. But the United Kingdom never gave him a diplomatic passport because he was an internationally protected person. And of course, he had to lower certain scenarios or possibilities so that precisely the United Kingdom could not oppose. And one of those possibilities that even the Chancellor of El Enigma Moreno initially knew was to generate a diplomatic passport so that he could leave and recover his condition of a protected person, which was illegal. That was not illegal. Because the diplomats in the countries that are not necessarily from the career can also be honorary or people in charge of the diplomatic service. That was not illegal. But unfortunately, now, to be effective, this situation did not take place. And it was just an option. But my criteria was a legal option, it was a diplomatic option that could be done. And that, unfortunately, because of Moreno's position, it was impossible to do. It was simply to contribute to the issue of asylum and to protect it. To the point that, when the embassy breaks and Sanj is already free, the U.S. has made 18 U.S. charges and a petition to study that this was what protected Ecuador and that what founded the conviction of Correa to contribute to asylum was true. That is, you have to look at it. The fears of the beginning in 2012 were realities in 2019. So it justified even more of the asylum and it justified any measure, although it is diplomatic, so that a person who did the right thing to denounce the truths, this progeny, and not like now, who is deprived of his freedom with a very strong physical and psychological friction and at the point of saying this. Okay, so it was illegal to end the asylum according to international law. Is that correct? Is that correct? No, no, no, no, no. Yes. So I'm just going to jump in there and play that long list of laws that I read out in November 2019 when we both spoke at a meeting in Australia about the expulsion from the embassy. The ombudsman of Ecuador, we just heard, has declared the expulsion of Julian Assange illegal and as a de facto extradition from Ecuador to the UK in breach of primarily Article 79 which excludes the possibility of extraditing any Ecuadorian citizen. And in fact, the problem is that there is a due process that must be followed to terminate a citizenship and that is subject to appeal as well. So the person whose citizenship is going to be taken off them and very often it's to do with not filling in documents correctly, not giving the correct information. Fraud, Julian has not been challenged on any of these grounds. It was an immediate decision but I'll just be specific about which laws have been broken. So the rights to nationality Article 6, asylum, Article 41, the principle of non-reformant Article 66 and 14 and guarantees of due process. They have all been limited and that would be Article 77 in particular provided for in the constitution of the Republic, the human mobility law and in international human rights. Instruments and in fact, it would say that Julian Assange is still an Ecuadorian citizen. Thank you. He says that the United States proved with the accusations that they made against Assange that the Ecuadorian decision to give Assange the political asylum was legal. That it was, you know, based on international human rights law. Okay, next question. Under Moreno life in the embassy became very difficult for Assange. Moreno shut off his internet connection in March 2018, I believe. It doesn't seem like Moreno was acting on his own. There were 10 Democratic senators in the United States who pressured then Vice President Mike Pence to bring up the Assange case with Moreno when Pence visited Ecuador in June of 2018, just after the internet was shut off. And there was also talk that the United States used leverage about an IMF loan to get Ecuador to end the asylum. What do you know about the pressure that the U.S. put on Moreno to lift Assange's asylum? That there was pressure from the United States and from the United Kingdom for Moreno to give the turn that he made on a diplomatic issue, on an ideological issue. It is correct what is said because of what we know about intention cards for loans from the Monetary Fund. And that in one of the clauses could be established that the loans could flow from the Monetary Fund as long as Assange was handed over. And that was also in the loans of international character but also military agreements. Alan Duncan even points out how the Pelican operation said that Assange took out the major Pelican operation because the people of intelligence that directed Assange's exit had as an identification a naked Corbata with a figure of a Pelican. That is why it is the Pelican operation. He says it to Alan Duncan in his book of Memories. Including Alan Duncan. It was my first English. Yes, yes, yes. After Assange's exit he came to visit Ecuador and even says he gave him an English money as a souvenir to Assange and that there was a defense minister Harin who went to England and paid him all the expenses to prepare for the military cooperation. So Assange's delivery meant to Ecuador in the opening of the United States and of Great Britain the United Kingdom for military agreements and the development of economic loans. That was the condition. That is to say that Assange's head allowed, among other things, the opening of the Ecuador in front of countries that we had with Correa a certain distance for the ideological issue. Because Assange in the Correa era did not have any type of delivery conditioning. It was simply not delivered and that's it. So it's very modern and it changes everything. Absolutely. And yes, it is correct that the delivery of Assange between Comillas facilitated the international loans and military agreements with the United States and the United Kingdom. What has the reaction in Ecuador been to Assange's arrest and to his continued imprisonment? It's divided. I think there is a minority that supports Assange and a vast majority that is disinformation. Because the media companies and the large chains of information have distorted the information in Ecuador. Indicating that it was a rapist that was not a journalist that is a hacker that in the embassy caused many problems. That it was we were mal-created that it was disrespectful and therefore this caused a lot of damage to the image of Ecuador and the world. This is a truth positioned by the doctors and obviously as a large percentage of the population is left to take for this information the situation is not very clear the reasons and even many think that it is not equatorial. In this sense there is a very divided situation and also very prejudiced. I wanted to complement the previous idea because very skillfully Moreno created a protocol of written coexistence that is, what was the relation of the interior of the embassy? Who paid for the drugs? Who paid for the washing of clothes? The care of the pet? Etc. Etc. Even the coexistence there was always verbal character with a verbal character flow. Moreno did it with writings and that was the way if it transgressed health. One of the norms of coexistence should be expelled. That document was consensuated with the United States and Great Britain is what is known. And it was the pretext for, in quotes, legally to withdraw the asylum. So the image that is seen in Ecuador is not the most optimal I could say that Mexico for example has more knowledge than Ecuador as a population. The struggle in Mexico is very risky. I imagine that Joe already saw in Mexico what is the answer. Here there are no collectives of activism that defend Julian. There is no because it is almost unnoticed to science and they are almost forgotten. So it is very complicated because the media have positioned that idea and Moreno did the correct thing to withdraw the embassy. Elizabeth, do you have any more questions for Carla? Yeah, just one more to follow up on that. Do you have any comment, discussion about the Mexican president's attitude towards Assange and his attempts to help him? Asilo the judge in London said that precisely because of that freedom was not given to him. Because Assange has no reason to be arrested. He has no cause has no sanction but they have it locked up in Belmont. It is like seeing a common criminal with a high danger. When he has absolutely nothing wait only the decision of tradition that could make it freedom. And the judges said that that position of Assange in other countries justifies the danger of escaping and that was inaudible. It cannot be. So if it were to be accepted Assange should have a safe conduct or be in freedom of what it has. So it is very difficult to go to Mexico. But if you thank the front and it seems to me that the parents of Julian are doing a correct job. They have visited Mexico with those who studied in Brazil and also in Colombia. And this movement at a level South American is very interesting very important because one of the possibilities of Julian's freedom is that the United States removes the charges or generates an induction that we knew that Trump was going to do but then because of the pressure of his senators did not do it. So not only is the fight now judicial but also diplomatic the United States could remove the charges. Yes. So in the course of the approaches that Biden has with several Latin American presidents they are putting their agenda of bilateral conversations with Biden also a matter of Assange for him to remove the charges through the Justice Department. So the disciplines that Assange does is very important. It is my position and it is very important because the issue not only is judicial it is also diplomatic and the mobilization of people in the sensitivity of the TMSF is also very important. The collectives the editors of the main newspapers of the world have pronounced that it must be Assange's freedom and that also generates a different media attitude and criticism that other companies commercial and also that are important in exchange generate against Assange. Thank you. I think that's all for me. Joe, if you have anything else. Do you have any questions for Carlos? Yes. Okay, the ex ambassador the Ecuadorian ambassador in London went to his post over there in 2000 I think it was 2012. Carlos Abad was his name. Before Lenin Moreno he filed a complaint in Ecuador that UC Global had hacked his email account and had also complained that the UC Global was doing extreme things on the that went beyond the contract that they had given him. You know Morales the owner of UC Global so that was a complaint of the ex ambassador of Ecuador Carlos Abad about UC Global. And you know shortly later you know Lenin Moreno removed the ambassador from his post. That would be the question to Carlos Abad. Yes, Carlos Abad who has already failed was a very important character in the transition. In fact that document that had a personal access of the embassy that knows perfectly Fidel Narváez did not appear in this document never appeared. And not only they because when UC Global was discovered with these agents that were torsionated with the information in the declaration of a worker of the company UC Global they manifest that the vitagoras of income and the hearing and the recordings were handed to intelligence agents who were not the Senaí and that Carlos Valencia and the same president Moreno Carlos Valencia or Valencia that of the minister of foreign relations that now precisely is in the same economic world so not only it was the letter of Abad but also the declaration of a worker who was under protection in Spain that he assures that all this information went to other types of agencies that were not the Ecuadorian and that they went above and also he denounced Morales that for this situation that he did of entre comillas collaboration he was beneficiary of security contracts in the United States especially in Las Vegas and that he was hired by characters that supported the campaign of Donald Trump it was like a payment of the work that was done inside the country I want to thank you Carlos for your time finally I would like to ask you about the political situation here in Ecuador right now President Guillermo Lasso is facing impeachment from the National Assembly of allegations of corruption including ties to organized crime tax evasion corruption in the energy sector many politicians diplomats seem to be living in exile right now please explain the political tensions in Ecuador today in the issue of justice there is a selectivity for persecution to certain politicians with a career and Lasso was one of the main political entities with Moreno to the point that when the Lasso arrives he followed with the same institutionality of Moreno if we can't explain Lasso without explaining to us previously what he did in Moreno Moreno many times goes unnoticed but he originated all this debate the murders in the prisons he originated Moreno too and he continues with Lasso of course Lasso is a person who has interest in vacations he has a lot of money and what he notes is that he works for his political class he is involved now in issues of support of drug trafficking and organized crime he can't control the prisons the issue of insecurity in the country is very strong he now has the highest rates of crime that has never been lived in the country never never been lived at least in the democratic era since the 80s we have never had this situation there is no contribution in education in health the immigrant people now with much more frequency just like the 90s the young people don't want to live in the country if there are no sources of work so all this makes the political crisis very strong but also a crisis is about corruption because Lasso increases a lot corruption in shopping as a businesswoman as a businesswoman who can be legislated is like it was markets you buy them and sell them and obviously everything will depend on the amount of votes you have there are 92 votes to destitute the president if he doesn't have it he will continue but that would mean that various indigenous movements socials and popular claim in the assembly that is the scenario that comes to us can be very dantesque and on the other hand that Lasso is shrinking in a public force so many armed forces like the police and is taking strategies precisely to blind him and with a public force to Lasso we are seeing a crisis never before seen and what is being observed is simply a revanchism and a polarity between racists and non-racists we could also have a scenario of anticipated elections and in fact they are promoting candidates it is complex it is not very difficult to know what we are going to conclude but it is not in a scenario the most favorable and the cough from from Lasso not going to be because it will also depend on other interests we said here the embassy that is the interests of the United States in Ecuador precisely that is a very critical point that should be analyzed that is this happened as moreno occurred with lasso because of the visit of senators to leave with lasso not like it was the space of them there is no beginning of autonomy of sovereignty that is the minimum that there is in lasso therefore it is a scenario dantesque it is a scenario very dangerous and not very favorable for the interests of the people what about the issue of free speech in Ecuador today there was a massive march of workers on mayday through the streets of the old city of Quito and many were calling for socials revolution for lasso's impeachment it appears there's seems to be freedom of expression to criticize the government as and lasso as you you have just done a palesar que lasso a Dicho que son demócrate a las condiciones no estandadas porque para in sectores que no somo oficialistas habido a veces problemas en el pongo ejemplo los funcionarios de lasa nunca van a entrevistas con medios que supuestamente están identificados con correo or que no pactan entrevistas no las entrevistas de lasso por lo general se hacen con empresas mediaticas aderentes a él este libertad de libertad expresión genera problemas porque desinforma hay actos que deberían hacerlo y mienten hay cadenas aquí televisiva secuavisa teleamazonas telecentro tele ecuador el comercio telera fue expresó que posicionan mentiras que nunca contrasta y evidentemente de esa manera desinforman al país el otro es de que en este puesto espacial de libertad expresión que ahora lazo hay dos periodistas que han hecho seguimiento a crisis carcelar y así que han tenido que salir del país situación que nunca antecedió precisamente por peligro y amenazas de muerte hay un estamento que se llamamos funda medios que se autodenominan que solamente sirve para defender a los periodistas del aso no para el resto las coberturas de los levantamientos indígenas 2022 eran coberturas parcializadas gracias a los medios independientes y comunitarios nos informamos de la que pasaba en la realidad porque la mayor parte era desinformación lo mismo que ocurrió en 2019 las empresas mediéticas tienen cercanía con el poder económico las líneas editoriales se manejan a través de intereses partidistas a favor de un gobernante y no a favor de la sociedad por lo tanto la libertad de expresión en el ecuador es totalmente tergiversada es una información a medias una información que siempre está a favor del gobernante y que obviamente eso genera opinión pública tergiversada y quien no esté de acuerdo con esa línea tiene que salir tal es el poder de los medios que muchos llegados a las empresas mediáticas ejemplo tele Amazonas ahora lo tiene como secretario de entresión pública un exgerente mediático un hijo de en el caso de de periodista o quien no llegó que no está de embajador en lo tenemos editorialistas que están como representantes ante naciones unidas la OEA es decir esa es la forma como trabaja el gobierno con los años de las empresas otorgando cargos políticos entonces no hay objetividad ni tampoco imparcialidad ni tampoco transversalización de la verdad vivimos lamentablemente es espacio. Well I want to thank you Carlos for your time today and thank you Jose Rivera I also want to thank my co-host Elizabeth boss and our executive producer Kathy Morgan we leave you with these scenes from the Mayday March in Keto. If you are a consumer of independent news in the first place you should be going to is consortium news and please do try to support them when you can it doesn't have its articles behind a paywall it's free for everyone it's one of the best news sites out there and it's been in the business of independent journalism and adversarial independent journalism for over two decades I hope that with the public's continuing support of consortium news it will continue for a very long time to come thank you so much.