Expressen: Swedish prosecution planned to attend #Assange’s proceedings undercover, while refusing to question him in the UK.
News about the judgement of the appeal have finally surfaced, and we’re pleased to tell you that the High Court will deliver the judgement on the 2nd November (Wednesday). The hearing will start at 9:45, so if you feel that you can make it by then, by all means do.
The nearest underground station to the Royal Courts Of Justice is Temple. For directions on how to get there, we recommend using TFL. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/
So come on down and support Julian with your voice, banners, posters and anything else you can conjure up. However, it doesn’t really matter if you don’t have a poster or a banner; just you being there is enough. We really need all the support we can get on this one.
And as always, please do not RSVP as ‘attending’ if you are supporting in spirit. While the thought is very much appreciated, we need to know the approximate number of people who are actually going to attend.
Legal outline leads to hyped headlines
Assange might fear execution, but that wasn’t the main point of the outline released by his attorney. Earlier this week, Assange’s lawyer released a skeletal outline of arguments for the court’s extradition hearing next month. The outline itself is 35 pages long and centers on seven points.
However, the majority of the press coverage of the outline has focused on a single aspect of point seven, which argues that Assange’s human rights may be violated if he is extradited.
Specifically, point seven of the outline says that Assange reserves the right to argue that his extradition may be incompatible with ‘Articles 3, 6, 8 and 10’ of the European Commission on Human Rights.
“It is submitted that there is a real risk that, if extradited to Sweden, the US will seek his extradition and/or illegal rendition to the USA, where there will be a real risk of him being detained at Guantanamo Bay or elsewhere, in conditions which would breach Article 3 of the ECHR.
Indeed, if Mr. Assange were rendered to the USA, without assurances that the death penalty would not be carried out, there is a real risk that he could be made subject to the death penalty. It is well-known that prominent figures have implied, if not stated outright, that Mr. Assange should be executed.”
The bulk of the legal outline centers on the facts in the case, as the defense sees them.
Namely, that the Swedish prosecutor isn’t authorized to issue European Arrest Warrants (EAWs). In the event that she is authorized to issue them, she was wrong to do so anyway, as EAWs are for prosecution and Assange was wanted for questioning only. The third and fourth points hang on abuse of process and non-disclosure by the Swedish prosecution.
In the fifth point, the outline argues that the offences listed in the EAW for Assange are not of a serious nature in the U.K., so there is no standing for extradition. The sixth and final point overlooked by the majority of the media focuses on Assange being punished for his political opinions and that a trial would therefore be prejudicial.
Headlines draw readers, and the more sensational the headline, the more readers you attract. It is no surprise to see the fear of execution leading the coverage of court documents, but there is much more going on behind the scenes in this trial.
You can view the entire document yourself, courtesy of Assange’s legal team, via the FSI website.
Assange is due to appear in court on February 7 and 8.