SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Today was the second and final day of Julian Assange's court battle against extradition to Sweden. Prosecutors offered their rebuttal stating that Sweden's extradition request was valid, impartial, and consistent with international law.
Should the judges favor Assange, who is challenging the legality of the extradition, the decision would 'overturn' European law.
The hearing has come to a close, but the judges will defer their decision for 'several weeks', with no set date.
The Guardian reports:
The supreme court has heard two days of dense legal argument relating to Sweden's attempts to extradite Julian Assange to face accusations of rape and sexual assault, which he denies. The justices will now consider their verdict, which will be handed down within weeks. [...]
The lawyers clashed on the interpretation of many of the same sources, including the 1957 European convention on extradition and the statements ministers gave to MPs and peers during the passage of the extradition bill. Both QCs came under detailed questioning from the justices, and it was unclear which way the justices will lean. However, before the two-day hearing began legal experts expected the supreme court to back Sweden.
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Today was the second and final day of Julian Assange's court battle against extradition to Sweden. Prosecutors offered their rebuttal stating that Sweden's extradition request was valid, impartial, and consistent with international law.
Should the judges favor Assange, who is challenging the legality of the extradition, the decision would 'overturn' European law.
The hearing has come to a close, but the judges will defer their decision for 'several weeks', with no set date.
The Guardian reports:
The supreme court has heard two days of dense legal argument relating to Sweden's attempts to extradite Julian Assange to face accusations of rape and sexual assault, which he denies. The justices will now consider their verdict, which will be handed down within weeks. [...]
The lawyers clashed on the interpretation of many of the same sources, including the 1957 European convention on extradition and the statements ministers gave to MPs and peers during the passage of the extradition bill. Both QCs came under detailed questioning from the justices, and it was unclear which way the justices will lean. However, before the two-day hearing began legal experts expected the supreme court to back Sweden.
Today was the second and final day of Julian Assange's court battle against extradition to Sweden. Prosecutors offered their rebuttal stating that Sweden's extradition request was valid, impartial, and consistent with international law.
Should the judges favor Assange, who is challenging the legality of the extradition, the decision would 'overturn' European law.
The hearing has come to a close, but the judges will defer their decision for 'several weeks', with no set date.
The Guardian reports:
The supreme court has heard two days of dense legal argument relating to Sweden's attempts to extradite Julian Assange to face accusations of rape and sexual assault, which he denies. The justices will now consider their verdict, which will be handed down within weeks. [...]
The lawyers clashed on the interpretation of many of the same sources, including the 1957 European convention on extradition and the statements ministers gave to MPs and peers during the passage of the extradition bill. Both QCs came under detailed questioning from the justices, and it was unclear which way the justices will lean. However, before the two-day hearing began legal experts expected the supreme court to back Sweden.