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
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who has not left the Ecuadorian embassy in London, England since 2012, will ask the Swedish Supreme Court to lift the arrest warrant against him on Wednesday. (Photo: Xavier Granja Cedeno/Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores)
Julian Assange Asks Swedish Supreme Court to Lift Arrest Warrant
Lawyers to argue that threat of extradition imposes 'severe limitations' on WikiLeaks founder
Feb 25, 2015
WikiLeaks founder and journalist Julian Assange on Wednesday asked the Swedish Supreme Court to lift the arrest warrant against him which has trapped him in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for nearly three years.
His lawyers will argue that the warrant has imposed "severe limitations" on Assange, who claimed asylum in 2012 to escape extradition to the U.S. for publishing a cache of classified military and State Department documents.
The warrant stems from allegations of sexual assault against Assange which came in 2010 in Sweden. He has not been charged with any crimes in that case and has denied the accusations. The prosecutor in the case, Marianne Ny, has said she cannot charge Assange until interviewing him, but has declined his offers to do so at the embassy in London.
Stockholm's appeal court rejected a similar request in November on the grounds that lifting the warrant would risk allowing Assange to flee legal proceedings, and that his confinement to the embassy was self-imposed. However, according to the Guardian, legal opinion in Sweden has since "swung against the prosecutor's decision not to travel to London to interview Assange."
The Guardian reports:
If they lose the case in Sweden, Assange's lawyers are looking to appeal to the European court, where they say legal thinking on detention "speaks strongly" in their favour. Sweden's interpretation that Assange is not deprived of his liberty appears to be at odds with ECHR jurisprudence, said Jennifer Robinson, an Australian lawyer for Assange.
Assange has said that his confinement in the embassy, which has been imposed absent of any criminal charges, is a violation of Article 5 of the European convention on human rights, which guarantees fundamental liberty and security of person. In June of last year, 59 global human rights organizations condemned Sweden's "pre-charge detention" of Assange, which they called "a clear violation of his fundamental human rights, yet they remain beyond the reach of judicial review."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
WikiLeaks founder and journalist Julian Assange on Wednesday asked the Swedish Supreme Court to lift the arrest warrant against him which has trapped him in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for nearly three years.
His lawyers will argue that the warrant has imposed "severe limitations" on Assange, who claimed asylum in 2012 to escape extradition to the U.S. for publishing a cache of classified military and State Department documents.
The warrant stems from allegations of sexual assault against Assange which came in 2010 in Sweden. He has not been charged with any crimes in that case and has denied the accusations. The prosecutor in the case, Marianne Ny, has said she cannot charge Assange until interviewing him, but has declined his offers to do so at the embassy in London.
Stockholm's appeal court rejected a similar request in November on the grounds that lifting the warrant would risk allowing Assange to flee legal proceedings, and that his confinement to the embassy was self-imposed. However, according to the Guardian, legal opinion in Sweden has since "swung against the prosecutor's decision not to travel to London to interview Assange."
The Guardian reports:
If they lose the case in Sweden, Assange's lawyers are looking to appeal to the European court, where they say legal thinking on detention "speaks strongly" in their favour. Sweden's interpretation that Assange is not deprived of his liberty appears to be at odds with ECHR jurisprudence, said Jennifer Robinson, an Australian lawyer for Assange.
Assange has said that his confinement in the embassy, which has been imposed absent of any criminal charges, is a violation of Article 5 of the European convention on human rights, which guarantees fundamental liberty and security of person. In June of last year, 59 global human rights organizations condemned Sweden's "pre-charge detention" of Assange, which they called "a clear violation of his fundamental human rights, yet they remain beyond the reach of judicial review."
Nadia Prupis
Nadia Prupis is a former Common Dreams staff writer. She wrote on media policy for Truthout.org and has been published in New America Media and AlterNet. She graduated from UC Santa Barbara with a BA in English in 2008.
WikiLeaks founder and journalist Julian Assange on Wednesday asked the Swedish Supreme Court to lift the arrest warrant against him which has trapped him in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for nearly three years.
His lawyers will argue that the warrant has imposed "severe limitations" on Assange, who claimed asylum in 2012 to escape extradition to the U.S. for publishing a cache of classified military and State Department documents.
The warrant stems from allegations of sexual assault against Assange which came in 2010 in Sweden. He has not been charged with any crimes in that case and has denied the accusations. The prosecutor in the case, Marianne Ny, has said she cannot charge Assange until interviewing him, but has declined his offers to do so at the embassy in London.
Stockholm's appeal court rejected a similar request in November on the grounds that lifting the warrant would risk allowing Assange to flee legal proceedings, and that his confinement to the embassy was self-imposed. However, according to the Guardian, legal opinion in Sweden has since "swung against the prosecutor's decision not to travel to London to interview Assange."
The Guardian reports:
If they lose the case in Sweden, Assange's lawyers are looking to appeal to the European court, where they say legal thinking on detention "speaks strongly" in their favour. Sweden's interpretation that Assange is not deprived of his liberty appears to be at odds with ECHR jurisprudence, said Jennifer Robinson, an Australian lawyer for Assange.
Assange has said that his confinement in the embassy, which has been imposed absent of any criminal charges, is a violation of Article 5 of the European convention on human rights, which guarantees fundamental liberty and security of person. In June of last year, 59 global human rights organizations condemned Sweden's "pre-charge detention" of Assange, which they called "a clear violation of his fundamental human rights, yet they remain beyond the reach of judicial review."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.