It's an interesting theory, but I'm not sure if I believe it. Which gag order is this, and how does it apply to Wikileaks?

It is a gag order on Asssange: He is prohibited from "carrying out activities that could be considered political and interference in the internal affairs of other states, or that may cause harm to the good relations of Ecuador with any other state".

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/16/ecuadorian_embassy_... http://www.codigovidrio.com/code/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/...

Going through his lawyers and explicitly saying that this is a confidential legal document is a way to get press for his case while not technically violating the conditions.

Thanks for the links. I don't think it's fair to call a voluntary agreement in exchange for asylum a "gag order", and I don't think that Wikileaks as an organization would be subject to the agreement, but you are right: it doesn't seem impossible that this approach is an end-run around the agreement.

On the other hand, I'm doubtful that there is sufficient incentive for Assange to try such a workaround. My Spanish is weak, but it looks like the last few lines of the agreement say that it can be unilaterally modified by the Embassy at any time. This would seem to negate any advantage of adhering to the word but not the spirit of the agreement.