Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Assange seeks asylum in Ecuador embassy, London

It looks like he wants a guarantee from Sweden now that they'll not hand him to the US. I think the best result for Wikileaks woul be for him to get this guarantee, then go and be questioned.
 
Random said:
I can see JA's point though - that the US may hold secret the grand jury's decision, then formally announce an indictment at the most favourable time.
Click to expand...
They might, but then does that become a precedent? I am called for questioning in one country, but claim I can't attend because another country may perhaps extradite me, and, if it does, might then at some point subject me to cruel or degrading punishment.
 
Random said:
It looks like he wants a guarantee from Sweden now that they'll not hand him to the US. I think the best result for Wikileaks woul be for him to get this guarantee, then go and be questioned.
Click to expand...
Thing is, that cannot be good enough for them - they must refuse even that as it is a set-up, and one they clearly cannot take down or they would have done so already.
 
This has all the makings of a quirky sitcom

Julian Assange at home with the Ambassadors family

But he keeps leaving dirty cups every where! complained Mrs Ambassador

Don't worry my dear we'll soon have him packed off to Sweden

And he keeps leaving the milk out of the fridge! Three times he's done that this week. And as for the state he leaves the bathroom in, they clearly have poor toilet training in Australia

Mr Ambassador fidgeted uncomfortably: It's just for a week or two dear, don't get yourself worked up

Oh for Christ's sake now where is the TV control! He always leaves it on that awful Russia Today
 
Sweden refuses to guarantees Assange wont be extradited to the US after the rape allegations are dealt with. That seems a bit suspect, if the whole extradition was just about the rape allegations then surely Sweden would be able to give a guarantee,if not ulterior motives spring to mind.
http://m.thelocal.se/41636/20120625/
 
sunny jim said:
Sweden refuses to guarantees Assange wont be extradited to the US after the rape allegations are dealt with. That seems a bit suspect, if the whole extradition was just about the rape allegations then surely Sweden would be able to give a guarantee,if not ulterior motives spring to mind.
http://m.thelocal.se/41636/20120625/
Click to expand...
Why? They have an extradition treaty. Pretty sure it doesn't say that it can't be used ever. The UK has also said the same. There is nothing suspicious there at all. You can't guarantee that the law will not be used against an individual.

You'll note the article doesn't actually say anything like "Sweden refuses to guarantees Assange wont be extradited to the US after the rape allegations are dealt with". It's merely the opinion of a "government civil servant".
 
And how would it be possible to give such a guarantee, our legal systems cannot be overridden in such a manner. The UK could not give such a guarantee either, fundamental aspects of various existing legal frameworks would have to be modified in order to do so. Extradition laws and agreements would have to be reformed in a direction opposite to the one this stuff has been travelling in for a long time now.

Edit - Butchers beat me to it.

Personally I am not a great fan of the existing extradition frameworks, but there are plenty of other examples that it would be easier to build a cause around than the messy & tainted Assange case, especially so long as no formal extradition request exists in his case.
 
Seeing as the charges brought by the US on Assange are political not criminal and the whole world knows this, a guarantee from Sweden would be very useful to ally any fears that the extradition to that country is not just a scam to get him to the US. The way the US has treated Bradley Manning, being kept naked for months on end in solitary confinement with possible torture, makes this case exceptional. So a guarantee seems perfectly in order, if they wont give one then I dont blame Assange for not going there.
 
If he does go to Sweden its pretty much certain now that he will extradited pronto because he will be kept in jail from the start off. At least here he wont be kept incommunicado and has a better chance of beating the extradition to the US.
 
sunny jim said:
If he does go to Sweden its pretty much certain now that he will extradited pronto because he will be kept in jail from the start off. At least here he wont be kept incommunicado and has a better chance of beating the extradition to the US.
Click to expand...
How the hell have you established this is the case? In any of your claims above.
 
@ Spymaster under the terms of an EAW a suspect can be held in jail in a foreign country for months or years before being tried. Assange wont get bail if he goes to Sweden, that much is pretty certain. And when you're in jail, with limited time to speak regularly to your legal team due to lack of phones, its going to be easier to extradite you than if you were out on bail.

http://rjcurrie.typepad.com/international-and-transna/
 
Why is it certain that they'll bang him up at all?

The link you provide does not back up any of the assertions you've made .
 
sunny jim said:
@ Spymaster under the terms of an EAW a suspect can be held in jail in a foreign country for months or years before being tried. Assange wont get bail if he goes to Sweden, that much is pretty certain. And when you're in jail, with limited time to speak regularly to your legal team due to lack of phones, its going to be easier to extradite you than if you were out on bail.

http://rjcurrie.typepad.com/international-and-transna/
Click to expand...
That's nothing at all to do with a EAW - that's to do with the legal system in the country who requested the EAW. Do read up.

Why is it? They have their case worked out already (they have no faith in it as is clear). Namely: it would be a political extradition so therefore not allowable.
 
There are european courts that will get involved if it comes down to the question of extraditing him to the USA. You know, the same ones that have caused our government some problems when trying to remove several 'terrorists'.
 
Well, that testimony from both Birgitta Winberg and the Council of Europe says it in that article.
eta not just Assange but prisoners held on remand in Sweden generally.
 
From the article...

Sweden's procedures for dealing with those accused of crimes are worthy of consideration, and indeed have been the subject of several reports by the Council of Europe. ​

Sweden is a harsher society than people think, and Swedish law, society and morality can be surprisingly authoritarian. ​

Prison chaplain Birgitta Winberg, who has gained huge experience of other nations' prison systems as president of the International Prison Chaplains' Association, visits Swedish prisoners on remand and thinks the world has a rosy view of her country. ​

Winberg describes Swedish remand prisons as the worst in Europe. 'In no other country are people in isolation before they are charged,' she said. A high proportion of prisoners - as much as 70 per cent at Kronoberg, in Stockholm - are placed under restrictions that may see them in their cells for 23 hours a day. Only visits from a lawyer and priest are allowed. ​

The prosecutor has to reapply to a judge for a remand extension every two weeks while amassing evidence that would justify charging the suspect, but it's usually a mere formality. Isolation makes it difficult to prepare a case, for example by securing an alibi.​

Winberg said: 'Police and prosecutors are very powerful in Sweden, the odds are stacked against the defence. They represent the strong state and, once a suspect is arrested, there is this belief the state is always right.' ​

International organisations have also expressed concern at Swedish isolation policies. In a report published in December 2009, the Council of Europe wrote that, despite an 'ongoing dialogue' about remand conditions, Sweden had done little since previous visits and CoE concerns remained valid. The report said its delegates talked to remand prisoners and that the 'overwhelming majority had been given no explanation of the restrictions imposed on them. Many considered that the only reason why they were being prohibited contact with their family members was to 'break' them.' ​
 
Given that the end of the article mentions a rule change to be brought in in April 2011, it might be good to know what its been like since then.
 
Christine Assange: the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth…
On the allegations of rape:
The time that everything really changed for me was August 21, 2010. I was sitting in bed watching a movie and the phone rang. At the end of the phone was a foreign voice. He said how do you feel about the fact that Julian has been charged with rape? And my instinctive reaction was he wouldn’t do it. My second reaction was he’s been set up. That’s an instinctive reaction. But for me to help Julian there had to be more than just a mother’s instinct that he was set up. I knew I wouldn’t get the truth in the mainstream media… Both women involved in this “sex scandal” never alleged rape, but insisted that the sex was consensual and not violent. Woman SW has actually complained about being railroaded and was so upset that Julian was charged with rape that she refused to sign her statement. Woman AA, who took a condom to the police saying that Julian had deliberately torn a condom during sex, went for an examination that proved there was no DNA from either her or Julian in it… Within 24 hours the chief prosecutor of Stockholm, Eva Finné, said that there was absolutely no basis to the rape allegations and the allegations were dropped.
On the politics of the case in Sweden:
Interestingly, there is a domestic political agenda involved in Sweden. When the rape allegations were made on August the 20th, in one month’s time there was to be local and general elections in Sweden. And, “coincidentally”, woman AA, the police officer that interrogated woman SW, and both the lawyers in the law firm that picked up the case against Julian after it was dropped by the chief prosecutor, were all running for the same party, in the same elections, on the same platform of widening the definition of rape within consensual sex… The two laywers involved, Claus Borgstrom and Thomas Bodstrom, have previously been in the Swedish government. Claus Borgstrom knew AA. And they all know Marianne Ny, who is the Swedish prosecutor, because they all worked together on widening the sex offences for the last 10 years. Thomas Bodstrom, the partner of the woman’s lawyer, had in 2001 signed off on CIA torture flights for two Egyptian refugees who were tortured in Egypt and subsequently found to be innocent and in 2003 Sweden had to pay up compensation.
On how her son was keen to meet the allegations head on:
So some of the facts that were not [reported] right were that Julian offered himself for interview numerous times in Sweden and was knocked back by prosecutor Ny with various excuses. The particular chosen officer, the only one in Sweden, was sick, or was away. He offered to fly back in — no that couldn’t be done either… Unsuccessful in obtaining an interview with the prosecutor, Julian had business to attend to in releasing Cablegate and had to meet with media partners abroad. Marion Knight gave him permission to leave and he went to do his business. He found out that Nye now wanted to do an interview with him as soon as he’d left the country. He offered to fly back in on the 9th and 10th of October and she refused saying that it was a weekend, he offered to fly back on the 11 th October, she refused saying it was too far away. And this was all around the time of Cablegate coming out. The US knew that this was happening because Julian had contacted them and asked them to help with the redaction and they refused. So they knew it was coming up. Collateral Murder was out on the 4th of April. The Gillard coup was the 26th of June. The Afghan War Diaries was the 25th [of July] and the sex allegations were on the 20th of [August]. So it is all working quite nicely for them isn’t it?
Click to expand...
FWIW..;)
 
I see there is a theoretical possible solution towards the end of that article, although Im far from convinced the UK government will give such assurances:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/jul/26/ecuador-julian-assange-extradition-us?newsfeed=true


The Ecuadoreans said discussions had focused on what was likely to happen to Assange once legal proceedings in Sweden were completed.
The senior legal adviser said that under extradition law, the concept of "specialty" ensures an individual can only be extradited to one country – in the case of Assange, Sweden. Once legal proceedings in that country have been completed, the individual is given a 45-day leave, during which they are free to go where they want.
Assange should, therefore, be free to travel to any other state – including the UK, Ecuador or Australia – once legal proceedings against him are completed in Sweden.
However, specialty can be waived by the country granting the initial extradition request – in this case the UK – thereby allowing an individual to be extradited to a third country.
The senior legal adviser to the Ecuadoreans said that the home secretary, Theresa May, would need to waive specialty under section 58 of the Extradition Act 2003, before Assange could be extradited from Sweden to the US.
Despite repeated requests from Ecuador, the Foreign Office has not said whether or not May intends to exercise her powers to allow for any potential future extradition to the US. The Foreign Office did not respond to a request for comment.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

_Russ_
Assange release
2 3
Replies
65
Views
2K
hitmouse
hitmouse
phildwyer
Tucker Carlson and Assange
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
3K
Yuwipi Woman
Yuwipi Woman
phildwyer
Carlson visits Julian Assange
2 3 4 5
Replies
142
Views
6K
andysays
andysays
Bingoman
Hooded gunmen in Ecuador burst on to live tv with guns
Replies
16
Views
828
bcuster
bcuster
teqniq
Chevron and the pollution of the Amazon in Ecuador
Replies
14
Views
972
Jeff Robinson
Jeff Robinson
Back
Top Bottom