Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court

shrek · **Posted:** Wed May 30, 2012 4:36 am

Quote:

Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has lost his Supreme Court fight against extradition to Sweden to face accusations of sex offences.

Justices reached their judgement by a majority of five to two, the court's president, Lord Phillips, told the court during a televised hearing.

Mr Assange's lawyers had asked the UK's highest court to block his removal, arguing that a European arrest warrant issued against him was "invalid".

But the court ruled the extradition request had been "lawfully made"

More will no doubt follow.

realist · **Joined:** Fri Jan 23, 2009 1:33 pm **Posts:** 23935

Ecuador grants WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange asylum

Ecuador granted WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange political asylum Thursday. Assange sought refuge in Ecuador's London embassy June 19, hoping to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning over alleged sex crimes.

Read more at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the ... story.html

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 9:28 am

Reuters Aug. 16, 2012 Britain threatens to revoke the diplomatic status of Ecuador's Embassy in London

Quote:

Before the decision was announced, Britain said it could use a little-known piece of legislation to strip Ecuador's embassy of its diplomatic status so that Assange could be detained.

"It is too early to say when or if Britain will revoke the Ecuadorean embassy's diplomatic status," a Foreign Office spokesman said before Ecuador's decision was announced. "Giving asylum doesn't fundamentally change anything."

"We have a legal duty to extradite Mr Assange. There is a law that says we have to extradite him to Sweden. We are going to have to fulfill that law."

The Ecuadorean government has bristled at Britain's warning. It's foreign minister said Britain was threatening Ecuador with a "hostile and intolerable act" and accused London of blackmail.

This would be a very bad idea for embassies, diplomats, and diplomacy worldwide. The pressure to get Assange to the U.S. via Sweden must be very strong.

Even the British have failed the use of the word "it's." The war is lost.

TexasFilly · **Joined:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm **Posts:** 10768

Hokay. I haven't been following this Assange stuff all that closely, so I ask: what is Ecuador's interest in all of this? Thanks in advance.

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 9:37 am

TexasFilly wrote:

Hokay. I haven't been following this Assange stuff all that closely, so I ask: what is Ecuador's interest in all of this? Thanks in advance.

If Ecuador has an interest, it derives from its being a member of a left-leaning block of nations. Strangely, Sweden is too, also, or at least used to be.

TexasFilly · **Joined:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 12:52 pm **Posts:** 10768

TollandRCR wrote:

TexasFilly wrote:

Hokay. I haven't been following this Assange stuff all that closely, so I ask: what is Ecuador's interest in all of this? Thanks in advance.

If Ecuador has an interest, it derives from its being a member of a left-leaning block of nations. Strangely, Sweden is too, also, or at least used to be.

That seems a pretty weak reason to get into a diplomatic disaster with Great Britain. I'm not saying your answer is weak, I'm saying this doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

TollandRCR · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:01 am

TexasFilly wrote:

...
That seems a pretty weak reason to get into a diplomatic disaster with Great Britain. I'm not saying your answer is weak, I'm saying this doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Agreed. I think it has a lot of history. Ecuador accuses UK of treating it like a colony. Of course, Ecuador was never a colony of the UK.

I reemphasize the dangers posed by the UK's threat. The U.S. has sheltered dissidents in its embassies all over the world. Getting Assange is not worth it.

Welsh Dragon · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:34 am

I very much doubt that the UK will revoke the Embassy's status - it looks more like a bluff made to try to discourage the granting of asylum. As others have pointe dout Assange isn't worth it.

Just as a bit of background , the power to revoke was created at least partly in response to the shooting of British Police Officer in 1984. Someone in the Libyan Embassy opened fire on protesters outside, killing WPC Yvonne Fletcher who was assigned to police the protest.There was no action the police could take and the diplomats including the unknown shooter could only be expelled,

shrek · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 11:13 am

The threat to invoke the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 to strip the diplomatic status of the Ecuadorian embassy was unbelievably cack-handed.

It plays right into the egotistical alleged rapist's portrayal of himself as victim.

So far the UK Government has indicated that it has no intention of allowing Assange free passage from the embassy. He could be there for years. All his friends who put up his bail money can kiss that goodbye too. Also.

esseff44 · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 6:29 pm

Did not the US just take in a Chinese dissident and bring him to the US? It may be that the British had to make a noise but how far are they going to go to test the notion of asylum, who can grant it and who can't?

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 6:37 pm

esseff44 wrote:

Did not the US just take in a Chinese dissident and bring him to the US? It may be that the British had to make a noise but how far are they going to go to test the notion of asylum, who can grant it and who can't?

Unless the dissident* is placed in a diplomatic bag and carted out with the laundry mail, he is stuck at the Embassy. The Chinese dissident was released, went back to his home, and then was allowed to leave by the Chinese government as part of a deal.

* Note to Taitz: This is the correct spelling. Perhaps the North Korean Embassy somewhere would take you in.

chinacreekpj · **Joined:** Tue Jun 23, 2009 4:09 pm **Posts:** 1334

Sweden may have left-wing socialist policies, but I believe the gov't is a right wing coalition.

shrek · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 6:43 pm

It's not a question of who can grant asylum and who can't; it is whether it is legitimate or not.

Assange is not seeking to flee persecution from his home state (Australia) he is seeking to flee responsibility for the consequences of alleged sexual assaults.

This "champion of free speech" is also seeking to flee to a regime that has no great record with regard to its own dissenting journalists. Hypocrite.

A Legal Lohengrin · **Joined:** Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm **Posts:** 9708

chinacreekpj wrote:

Sweden may have left-wing socialist policies, but I believe the gov't is a right wing coalition.

I have generally heard it described by Swedes as a "center-right alliance." By American standards, it is left-wing, but America is not the world.

John Thomas8 · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 8:02 pm

Funny, the sexual assault "charges" were levied after the US government was embarrassed by the information made public.

There are no co-incidences.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:10 pm

John Thomas8 wrote:

Funny, the sexual assault "charges" were levied after the US government was embarrassed by the information made public.

There are no co-incidences.

Of course there aren't. Just ask Orly Taitz.

John Thomas8 · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:13 pm

taitz is in serious need of professional mental health services.

Assange dared to show the emperor can't behave.

One thing is not like the other.

Somerset · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:24 pm

John Thomas8 wrote:

taitz is in serious need of professional mental health services.

Assange dared to show the emperor can't behave.

One thing is not like the other.

Actually, Assange is just as much a narsiccist as O'rly. I realize he's kind of a cult hero to anti-establishment types, but he's really just loudmouthed punk who's seriously painted himself into a corner.

John Thomas8 · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:25 pm

Yes, exposing the stinking underbelly of nasty government behaviour is so "punk".

SueDB · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:38 pm

John Thomas8 wrote:

Yes, exposing the stinking underbelly of nasty government behaviour is so "punk".

Not to be nasty, but JT that really does sound like something Orly would screech about.

John Thomas8 · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:40 pm

It seems to be the fashion here, accusing people of emulating orly when they disagree with the hive mind.

Quite disconcerting at best.

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:43 pm

I think Assange exhibits many of the "qualities" that Taitz does. Taitz may be significantly more mentally ill and more narcissistic, but Assange is no sympathetic character. And he also appears to be a rapist. I shed no tears for him. I hope his stay in the Ecuadorian Embassy is a long one. And that his Internet service is sporadic. I also suspect the Ecuadorians will tire of bringing him visitors.

John Thomas8 · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:55 pm

Applying the same traits to desperate targets is a sign of tunnel-vision, everybody has to fit the set description.

SueDB · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 10:55 pm

John Thomas8 wrote:

It seems to be the fashion here, accusing people of emulating orly when they disagree with the hive mind.

Quite disconcerting at best.

I just see someone of above average intelligence wading in the same conspiracy pool as the birfers. :shock:

Sterngard Friegen · **Posted:** Thu Aug 16, 2012 11:03 pm

John Thomas8 wrote:

Applying the same traits to desperate targets is a sign of tunnel-vision, everybody has to fit the set description.

So far Taitz is not an accused rapist nor is she (yet, anyway) seeking some form of sanctuary from a government which routinely abuses the civil rights of its own citizens. On the other hand, Taitz wouldn't much like the law of Descato in Ecuador. (Nor, for that matter, would Assange.)

Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.

Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court

Who is online