Assange says he's expecting to stay in the Ecuadorian embassy for up to a year, while hoping Sweden drop the legal case against him. Let's imagine that he walked out on the embassy steps and agreed to being surrendered to Swedish authorities by British police. This could become reality if Sweden guaranteed that he wouldn't be sent to the US once the sex allegations case investigation is completed. But Swedish officials maintain that no such promises can be made. Many are wondering then; why can't such a guarantee be offered?
The answer is that Sweden is bound by an extradition treaty with the USA. If the US manages to satisfy a number of certain conditions, the American government could get Assange extradited to their shores. It's the Swedish Supreme Court who decides whether the conditions -that the accusation is also a crime in Sweden; the crime should not be considered political; capital punishment is not used; the UK has to approve the transfer as well, among other things- have all been satisfied.
Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt has stated that Sweden wouldn't extradite a suspect to a country where they would face the death penalty. Does that constitute a guarantee of sorts? Not really.
Pål Wrange, Associate Professor of International Law at the Faculty of Law at Stockholm University, says that there are ways for the Americans to get around the above conditions. In line with the European Convention, it is also illegal to extradite someone to a country where they face the risk of being tortured. But, explains Wrange, in specific cases extraditions could still proceed if a promise has been made not to exercise torture. This was infamously misjudged in the case of Ahmed Agiza and Mohammed Alzery in 2001. Sweden controversially handed over the two Egyptians to the American authorities, who then deported them back to Egypt where they were, in fact, tortured.
Sweden was severely criticised domestically as well as by UN authorities for the decision made by the Social Democratic government at the time. The two Egyptian men have since been compensated financially.
According to Law Professor Wrange, there is a risk that Assange could be extradited to the US from Sweden. But there is one major misunderstanding inherent in the notion that he needs to be "lured" over to the Scandinavian country. It's a misconception because the UK also has an extradition treaty with America, which is more generous than the Swedish equivalent. It's no secret that the UK and US are even better pals than the US and Sweden, so to speak.
Therefore, says Wrange, it's nonsense that it's somehow easier transferring Assange once he's in Sweden, than extraditing him from Great Britain. If anything, it's the other way around.
Even though the possibility exists in theory however, the question is whether Sweden would consider blindly following Washington's order of a politically motivated extradition again, with the media closely following Julian Assange's every move?
Follow Karin Wasteson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/KarinWasteson
Julian Assange - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Julian Assange | Media | The Guardian
Julian Assange arrest plan revealed accidentally | Media | guardian ...
Julian Assange predicts year-long stay in Ecuadorean embassy ...
An Excerpt From 'This Machine Kills Secrets': The Education Of Julian Assange
From Arab Spring to Autumn Rage: The Dark Power of Social Media
Gollum's defence team (or Gollum himself) has leaked the (apparent) contents of victims statements to the police.
The leaked documents show a very weak case against Gollum. So either:
1. The statements have been doctored by Gollum to gee up his worshippers that there is no case to answer.
2. These are the real statements.
If these are the real statements, then the rumour started by Gollum that the women were incited to make these claimsby people acting on behalf of the USA is extremely unlikely. Why? Because if you are going to frame someone for an offence, you make it a whopper, not a weak case. You paint him as black as possible, so he has no sympathy.
So if these are the real statements, there is no conspiracy, and then one must ask why Gollum is pretending that there is.
But if these are not the real statements, and they have been doctored by the leaker, then we have to ask - why? And who is the leaker? Well, it isn't actually in the interests of the Swedish prosecutor to leak them, as claimed by Gollum - it simply prejudices any proceedings against Gollum. In fact, if the Swedish prosecutor HAD leaked them, it would be evidence that there is no conspiracy, since it has the effect of torpedoeing any proceedings against Gollum.
So the Swedes haven't leaked them, and Gollum has form for leaking.
But the US don't want to grab Assange from the UK.
After all, it would make things a bit more awkward next time they want to make free use of our army.
Assange started out as a hacker, like every other spiteful little hacker.And of course, he still is.
No sympathy. None.