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
Julian Assange on the balcony of the Ecuadorian embassy in London. (Photo: Facundo Arrizabalaga/EPA)
Saying Extradition Fears Not 'Reasonable,' UK Judge Refuses to Lift Arrest Warrant for Julian Assange
"It is time to acknowledge what the real issue is and has always been in this case: the risk of extradition to the US," says lawyer for Wikileaks founder and editor
Feb 13, 2018
Saying she did not find "reasonable" his fears of being extradicted to the United States, a British judge on Tuesday refused to lift an arrest warrant for Julian Assange, despite Sweden recently dropping its extradition request for the Wikileaks' founder who has spent nearly five years living under asylum protection at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
The Guardian reports:
Handing down her judgment before a packed courtroom at Westminster magistrates court, senior district judge Emma Arbuthnot said she was not persuaded by the argument from Assange's legal team that it was not in the public interest to pursue him for skipping bail.
She said: "I find arrest is a proportionate response even though Mr Assange has restricted his own freedom for a number of years.
"Defendants on bail up and down the country, and requested persons facing extradition, come to court to face the consequences of their own choices. He should have the courage to do the same. It is certainly not against the public interest to proceed.
Assange, 46, skipped bail to enter the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault and rape, which he denies.
Though Swedish prosecutors dropped the investigation against him, he faces arrest if he leaves the building in Knightsbridge, London, for breaching his former bail conditions in the UK.
After the ruling, Assange's legal team indicated it would appeal the ruling. "Whether it is pursued is another question," Gareth Peirce, one of his attorneys told reporters outside the court. "The history of the case from start to finish is extraordinary. Each aspect of it becomes puzzling and troubling as it is scrutinised."
Over the weekend it was revealed, through a release of previously unseen internal government emails, that authorities in the UK pressured Sweden to keep its extradition request for Assange even when Swedish officials indicated as early as 2013 that they would prefer to drop it. "Don't you dare get cold feet!!!" a government lawyer told a Swedish counterpart when it was suggested Assange's detention was not proportionate to the request he submit to questions from law enforcement. Though Assange said from the outset he would answer any questions regarding the sexual assault charges, he repeatedly said it was only his fear of a secret U.S. indictment, and either Sweden or the UK extradicting him to the U.S., that led him to seek refuge in the embassy.
As his attorney Jennifer Robinson again made clear on Tuesday: "It is time to acknowledge what the real issue is and has always been in this case: the risk of extradition to the US."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. 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. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Saying she did not find "reasonable" his fears of being extradicted to the United States, a British judge on Tuesday refused to lift an arrest warrant for Julian Assange, despite Sweden recently dropping its extradition request for the Wikileaks' founder who has spent nearly five years living under asylum protection at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
The Guardian reports:
Handing down her judgment before a packed courtroom at Westminster magistrates court, senior district judge Emma Arbuthnot said she was not persuaded by the argument from Assange's legal team that it was not in the public interest to pursue him for skipping bail.
She said: "I find arrest is a proportionate response even though Mr Assange has restricted his own freedom for a number of years.
"Defendants on bail up and down the country, and requested persons facing extradition, come to court to face the consequences of their own choices. He should have the courage to do the same. It is certainly not against the public interest to proceed.
Assange, 46, skipped bail to enter the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault and rape, which he denies.
Though Swedish prosecutors dropped the investigation against him, he faces arrest if he leaves the building in Knightsbridge, London, for breaching his former bail conditions in the UK.
After the ruling, Assange's legal team indicated it would appeal the ruling. "Whether it is pursued is another question," Gareth Peirce, one of his attorneys told reporters outside the court. "The history of the case from start to finish is extraordinary. Each aspect of it becomes puzzling and troubling as it is scrutinised."
Over the weekend it was revealed, through a release of previously unseen internal government emails, that authorities in the UK pressured Sweden to keep its extradition request for Assange even when Swedish officials indicated as early as 2013 that they would prefer to drop it. "Don't you dare get cold feet!!!" a government lawyer told a Swedish counterpart when it was suggested Assange's detention was not proportionate to the request he submit to questions from law enforcement. Though Assange said from the outset he would answer any questions regarding the sexual assault charges, he repeatedly said it was only his fear of a secret U.S. indictment, and either Sweden or the UK extradicting him to the U.S., that led him to seek refuge in the embassy.
As his attorney Jennifer Robinson again made clear on Tuesday: "It is time to acknowledge what the real issue is and has always been in this case: the risk of extradition to the US."
Saying she did not find "reasonable" his fears of being extradicted to the United States, a British judge on Tuesday refused to lift an arrest warrant for Julian Assange, despite Sweden recently dropping its extradition request for the Wikileaks' founder who has spent nearly five years living under asylum protection at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
The Guardian reports:
Handing down her judgment before a packed courtroom at Westminster magistrates court, senior district judge Emma Arbuthnot said she was not persuaded by the argument from Assange's legal team that it was not in the public interest to pursue him for skipping bail.
She said: "I find arrest is a proportionate response even though Mr Assange has restricted his own freedom for a number of years.
"Defendants on bail up and down the country, and requested persons facing extradition, come to court to face the consequences of their own choices. He should have the courage to do the same. It is certainly not against the public interest to proceed.
Assange, 46, skipped bail to enter the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault and rape, which he denies.
Though Swedish prosecutors dropped the investigation against him, he faces arrest if he leaves the building in Knightsbridge, London, for breaching his former bail conditions in the UK.
After the ruling, Assange's legal team indicated it would appeal the ruling. "Whether it is pursued is another question," Gareth Peirce, one of his attorneys told reporters outside the court. "The history of the case from start to finish is extraordinary. Each aspect of it becomes puzzling and troubling as it is scrutinised."
Over the weekend it was revealed, through a release of previously unseen internal government emails, that authorities in the UK pressured Sweden to keep its extradition request for Assange even when Swedish officials indicated as early as 2013 that they would prefer to drop it. "Don't you dare get cold feet!!!" a government lawyer told a Swedish counterpart when it was suggested Assange's detention was not proportionate to the request he submit to questions from law enforcement. Though Assange said from the outset he would answer any questions regarding the sexual assault charges, he repeatedly said it was only his fear of a secret U.S. indictment, and either Sweden or the UK extradicting him to the U.S., that led him to seek refuge in the embassy.
As his attorney Jennifer Robinson again made clear on Tuesday: "It is time to acknowledge what the real issue is and has always been in this case: the risk of extradition to the US."
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.