"This appears to be the first time a US court has decided to close an entire website because of certain documents posted on it," Reporters Without Borders said. "In his ruling, the judge also asked for the offending documents to be removed. Why wasn't that enough? Wikileaks enables dissidents to post documents regarded as 'sensitive' in their own country. The Julius Baer case must not be allowed to prevent other key information from being made public."

This was not the first time a court action has been brought against Wikileaks. Schillings, a London-based firm of lawyers and public relations consultants, requested the site's closure last November over a leaked confidential memo about the ailing British bank Northern Rock.

The reaction of the site's founders and editors to the closure order has been low-key. They simply described it as "unconstitutional" and pledged that Wikileaks would continue to publish document demonstrating the illegal activities of certain banks.

When contacted by Reporters Without Borders, a Julius Baer & Co representative declined to make any comment aside from saying the court action was necessary to protect its interests.