Wikileaks' Assange Begins Extradition Battle

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wikileaks' Assange Begins Extradition Battle

Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday February 7, 2011 @04:26AM from the let-the-battle-begin dept.

arisvega writes "Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has begun his court battle against extradition from the UK to Sweden. He faces allegations of sexual assault against two women, which he denies. Mr Assange, 39, argues Swedish prosecutors had no right to issue a warrant for his arrest because he has not yet been charged with any offences. At the extradition hearing, in London's Belmarsh Magistrates' Court, his lawyers are also challenging the move on human rights grounds. Mr Assange's legal team, led by Geoffrey Robertson QC, argues that if their client is forced to return to Sweden he could be extradited to the US, or even Guantanamo Bay, to face separate charges relating to the publication of secret documents by Wikileaks."

10 of 479 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Sweden and United Kingdom has similar laws by inpher · 2011-02-07 05:05 · Score: 3, Interesting

Sweden has laws that are similar to those in the UK, so I see very little extra risk for Assange to be extradited to USA if he is transferred or travels to Sweden. I would think that staying in a NATO member (like UK) would be more of a risk. Extradition for Criminal Offences in Sweden:

Extradition is permitted, provided that the act for which extradition is requested is equivalent to a crime that is punishable under Swedish law by imprisonment for at least one year. [...] Extradition may not be granted for military or political offences. Nor may extradition be granted if there is reason to fear that the person whose extradition is requested runs a risk - on account of his or her ethnic origins, membership of a particular social group or religious or political beliefs - of being subjected to persecution threatening his or her life or freedom, or is serious in some other respect. [...] Furthermore, nor may the person who is extradited be sentenced to death.
1. Re:Sweden and United Kingdom has similar laws by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-07 05:13 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  Since cablegate surfaced, Sweden has pretty much been recognized globally as a NATO-member-in-disguise, Sweden exports sniffed intelligence data to US and even participates in military exercises with US, UK and a host of other NATO members. The bonds between the current Swedish government and the US are closer than they would have us believe.
  The Swedish population in general would disagree, but I'm a Swede and I'm convinced that no -- Assange would not get a fair trial. He'd get the same kind of trial as the Pirate Bay lads, one that is decided in advance by powerful political forces. If extradited to Sweden, he'd be in Guantanamo within a month.
2. Re:Sweden and United Kingdom has similar laws by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · 2011-02-07 05:18 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  Sweden has laws that are similar to those in the UK, so I see very little extra risk for Assange to be extradited to USA if he is transferred or travels to Sweden.
  Factions of the Swedish government have been secretly and illegally collaborating with the United States intelligence agencies as exposed by Wikileaks itself. Thus, the laws on record may not be as important as you think. Second, politically speaking it would be difficult for the UK to ship a member of the commonwealth to the US under questionable legal circumstances, given the US's human rights record at the moment. The people that actually vote for the UK politicians would probably view that as just a little too close to home, as in making them afraid they too could be shipped away to be tortured. This would get the UK politicians kicked out of office.
  On the other hand, if the UK were to ship him to Sweden to face unrelated charges, then the Swedish were to extradite him (legally or illegally) then the UK politicians could claim they were duped and likely keep their jobs. Swedish politicians would be seen extraditing a foreigner messed up with intelligence agencies and potential criminal acts and again, probably keep their jobs.
  All of this is, of course, exceedingly unlikely, but that doesn't mean it is not possible. The argument that shipping him to Sweden could actually result in him being taken illegally by US intelligence, held outside the US, but by US agents, and denied basic human rights. This is the bed the US made and now we must sleep in it a while. There was no real risk in throwing the Guantanamo prisoners into our federal prisons and prosecuting them (aside from political risk). It was all part of the fear-mongering designed as electoral ploys. We threw away any pretense of honor and justice as principals of our government and now we are openly treated as treacherous and dishonorable and unable to be trusted to uphold even the most basic human rights according to treaties we helped write.
  Is Julian Assange taking advantage of the US's shitty world image? Most likely. Who's to blame for this? We are, for giving his lawyers so much ammunition.
3. Re:Sweden and United Kingdom has similar laws by Anonymous Coward · 2011-02-07 08:34 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  This isn't legal in Sweden by any stretch of the imagination, yet it happened.
Re:What does this say... by spun · 2011-02-07 05:05 · Score: 5, Interesting

Why do you think it is that ridiculous that someone might think the US would send an enemy to Guantanamo?

--
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Re:Is it me by peragrin · 2011-02-07 05:10 · Score: 1, Interesting

Well That and so far his defense is Swedish law is unfair and not english or Australian law and therefore he won't get a fair trial. At least he stopped trying to blame the USA for the case.
If you don't like the laws of the country don't visit it. Ignorance of the law is never innocence.
Rape laws are very confusing, you have some places where it isn't rape unless you can get the men who are doing the raping to testify for you. To places like sweden where the woman is almost always right.

--
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
So a computer geek walks into a bar ... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · 2011-02-07 05:19 · Score: 2, Interesting

... and some chick asks him what he does for a living. He answers, "I'm a computer geek." She replies, "Oh, wow, that turns me on! Go to the restroom and get some condoms, and then we'll go back to my place!" If any Slashdotter posted something like that, the responses would be, "Yeah, right, in your dreams!"
So then three days later, he goes to another bar, and a different chick hits on him. The whole story seems quite apocryphal.
If this story is true, it sounds like Assange must be as charming as George Clooney and must be a skilled martial artist with nunchucks, which he needs to beat back the women folk.
I speculate that it went down like this:
CIA boss: "This WikiLeaks guy has really shoved a weed up our ass. What can we do?"
CIA lackey: "Oh, we have a pile of Hawaiian shellfish poison hidden in the cellar! If we prick him with a needle of that stuff, he will be dead before he hits the ground!"
CIA boss: "Hmmm. That sounds too drastic, and would raise suspicions. Can't we deck him with a honey trap?"
CIA lackey: "I'll call Stockholm."

--
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Re:What does this say... by c0d3g33k · 2011-02-07 05:29 · Score: 5, Interesting

I'd say that the existence of the Guantanamo Bay facility (set up outside U.S. soil to avoid the law) and the fact that people can arbitrarily be sent there to rot for years without trial speaks volumes about the current commitment of the United States Government to the ideals on which it was founded. In my youth the place to be feared was the Soviet Gulag. Now people fear Guantanamo Bay. I weep for what the government that represents this country has become, and am sad that my father (Vietnam vet) and his father (WW2 vet and survivor of the Bataan Death March) fought in vain for a government that has no respect for the ideas that brought it into existence. What the hell happened?
Re:What does this say... by Hatta · 2011-02-07 06:43 · Score: 5, Interesting

So far, Congress has forbidden the Executive from moving detainees from Guantanamo[3,4] by huge supermajority votes (90-6 in the Senate, for instance). The actual statutory language[5] is quite clear (quoted below).
The statutory language is quite clear. They have not prohibited the closure of Guantanamo. They have not prohibited Obama from moving detainees from Guantanamo. They have prohibited him from using budgeted funds to move detainees to the US.
There are any number of ways to deal with this. First, you could just unlock the doors, shut off the lights, and walk away. This option is free! Alternatively, he could find other ways to fund the closure of Guantanamo. Set up a collection plate and I'll donate.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:What does this say... by morgauxo · 2011-02-07 06:47 · Score: 3, Interesting

The US possesses a pretty big desert that is nobody's back yard. It also possesses islands big enough for a penitentiary that are US soil and yet in nobody's back yard.