Quantcast
Connect with us

Swedish court holds Julian Assange hearing to decide extradition request

Published

on

A Swedish court heard arguments Monday before deciding if prosecutors can proceed to request Julian Assange’s extradition from Britain, after a 2010 rape probe was re-opened in May.

Both sides presented their arguments to the Uppsala district court which adjourned to deliberate. It was expected to announce a decision at 4:00 pm (1400 GMT).

Swedish deputy director of public prosecutions Eva-Marie Persson said the WikiLeaks founder had not cooperated with the Swedish investigation previously, fleeing from an extradition order, and therefore needed to be detained and questioned in Sweden.

ADVERTISEMENT

She asked the court to order Assange’s detention in his absence, a standard part of Swedish legal procedure if a suspect is outside the country or cannot be located, and which would be the first step to having him extradited.

“The purpose of this detention is to be able to complete the investigation and bring Julian Assange to justice,” Persson said.

Assange’s Swedish lawyer, Per E Samuelson, meanwhile argued that a detention order was “meaningless” as Assange is currently imprisoned in Britain and should not be considered a flight risk.

He said it was not proportionate to ask for someone’s detention merely to conduct a questioning session.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Australian whistleblower, who holed himself up in Ecuador’s embassy in London for seven years to avoid a British extradition order to Sweden, was arrested by British police on April 11 after Quito gave him up.

He was subsequently sentenced to 50 weeks in prison for breaching bail conditions when he took refuge in the embassy.

Following his arrest Swedish authorities reopened their 2010 rape investigation, which had been closed in 2017 with the argument that it was not possible to proceed with the probe as Assange could not be reached.

ADVERTISEMENT

– Legal tug of war –

If the Uppsala court grants the prosecutor’s request, Eva-Marie Persson has made clear she intends to issue a European Arrest Warrant “concerning surrender to Sweden”.

Such a request would, however, have to compete with an extradition request from the United States, where Assange is facing a total of 18 charges, most of which relate to obtaining and disseminating classified information over the publishing of military documents and diplomatic cables through the website WikiLeaks.

ADVERTISEMENT

Assange could be sentenced to 175 years in prison if convicted on all 18 counts.

“In the event of a conflict between a European Arrest Warrant and a request for extradition from the US, UK authorities will decide on the order of priority. The outcome of this process is impossible to predict,” Persson said in May.

The decision of whether to extradite him to the United States or Sweden would rest with the British interior ministry.

ADVERTISEMENT

– Health concerns –

On Thursday, a scheduled hearing on the US extradition request in London was pushed forward with chief magistrate Emma Arbuthnot referring to Assange as “not very well,” and stating that the next hearing could be held at Belmarsh prison, where Assange is serving his sentence.

The day before, WikiLeaks expressed “grave concerns” over the condition of the organisation’s founder and said he had been moved to the prison’s health ward.

“During the seven weeks in Belmarsh his health has continued to deteriorate and he has dramatically lost weight,” WikiLeaks said in a statement.

ADVERTISEMENT

Assange’s lawyer, Per E Samuelson, had also unsuccessfully requested the Uppsala district court to postpone the Swedish hearing, citing difficulties he had preparing the case with his client.

Samuelson told AFP he had met with Assange in Belmarsh’s health ward on May 24, but had been unable to discuss the case properly since “it was difficult to have a normal conversation with him”.

The United Nations special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, Nils Melzer, on Friday said the various drawn-out legal procedures against Assange amounted to “psychological torture”.

ADVERTISEMENT

Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

This one fact that makes it likely Rudy Giuliani is the ‘target’ of federal prosecutors in Manhattan

Published

on

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani should be "concerned" that he is the target in a federal investigation by prosecutors in the Southern District of New York, former Assistant U.S. Attorney Cynthia Alksne explained on MSNBC on Monday.

"Speaking of Rudy Guiliani, there is the new report tonight from The Wall Street Journal that federal prosecutors have looked even at his financial records, his bank records," anchor Steve Kornacki reported. "What potentially could Rudy Guiliani be facing here?"

Continue Reading

CNN

Ex-Watergate prosecutor: Trump’s complaints about impeachment are ‘constitutionally unsound’

Published

on

On Monday's edition of CNN's "OutFront," former Watergate assistant counsel Philip Allen Lacovara told anchor Erin Burnett that President Donald Trump has no leg to stand on when he complains about the impeachment process.

"Look, it's the House. It's more of a grand jury investigation is how it's been described, right?" said Burnett. "This isn't about, you get to have a lawyer and counsel present and all of those things. But this is how they're going to play the game. They're going to say it's unconstitutional, a miscarriage of justice. Is there any truth to it?"

"No, there is no truth to it. It's a constitutionally unsound argument," said Lacovara. "One of the things I learned in law school is if you don't have the facts on your side, argue the law. If you don't have the law, argue the facts. If you don't have the facts or the law, you appeal to fairness or equity or something. That's basically where they are. They are complaining about process even though it's clear the House does not have any constitutional obligation to use any particular process."

Continue Reading
 

Breaking Banner

Ex-Pompeo adviser agrees to testify to impeachment investigators after resigning: report

Published

on

On Monday, Politico's Andrew Desiderio reported that Michael McKinley, a former ambassador to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, has agreed to testify behind closed doors to House Democrats leading the impeachment investigation against President Donald Trump:

NEWS: Former Pompeo adviser Michael McKinley, who resigned last week, will testify in closed session on Wednesday before House impeachment investigators, according to an official working on the inquiry.

— Andrew Desiderio (@AndrewDesiderio) October 14, 2019

Continue Reading
 
 
Help Raw Story Uncover Injustice. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1 and go ad-free.
close-image