Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority
|Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority|
|Court||Supreme Court of the United Kingdom|
|Full case name||Julian Paul Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority|
|Decided||30 May 2012|
|Citation(s)|| UKSC 22|
|Prior action(s)||Assange v The Swedish Judicial Authority  EWHC 2849 (Admin)
(2 November 2011)
|Appealed from||Administrative Court
(Sir John Thomas P · Ouseley J)
|Appealed to||Supreme Court|
|Judges sitting||Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers
Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe
Baroness Hale of Richmond
Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore
Julian Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority is the set of legal proceedings in the United Kingdom concerning the extradition of Julian Assange to Sweden on charges of having committed sexual offences. This article focuses on the legal proceedings themselves, and does not cover any detail of what Assange is actually accused of in Sweden beyond the names of the formal charges.
On 18 November 2010, the Stockholm District Court upheld an arrest warrant against Assange on suspicion of rape, unlawful coercion and three cases of sexual molestation. The warrant was appealed to the Svea Court of Appeal which upheld it but lowered it to suspicion of rape of a lesser degree, unlawful coercion and two cases of sexual molestation rather than three, and the warrant was also appealed to the Supreme Court of Sweden, which decided not to hear the case. At this time Assange had been living in the United Kingdom for 1–2 months. An extradition hearing took place in an English court in February 2011 to consider an application by Swedish authorities for the extradition of Assange to Sweden. The outcome of the hearing was announced on 24 February 2011, when the extradition warrant was upheld. Assange appealed to the High Court, and on 2 November 2011, the court upheld the extradition decision and rejected all four grounds for the appeal as presented by Assange's legal representatives. £19,000 costs was also awarded against Assange. On 5 December 2011, Assange was refused permission by the High Court to appeal to the Supreme Court. The High Court certified that his case raised a point of law of general public importance. The Supreme Court subsequently granted permission to appeal, and heard the appeal on 1 and 2 February 2012. The court reserved its judgment and dismissed the appeal on 30 May 2012. Assange has said the investigation is "without basis". He remained on conditional bail in the United Kingdom until on 19 June 2012 Assange sought refuge at Ecuador's Embassy in London and was granted temporary asylum. On 16 August 2012 he was granted full asylum by the Ecuadorian government.
- 1 Swedish investigation
- 2 Extradition process
- 3 Common misconceptions
- 4 References
- 5 External links
Complaints and initial investigation
The next day, the case was transferred to Chefsåklagare (Chief Public Prosecutor) Eva Finné. In answer to questions surrounding the incidents, the following day, Finné declared, "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape." However, Karin Rosander from the Swedish Prosecution Authority, said Assange remained suspected of molestation. Police gave no further comment at that time, but continued the investigation.
After learning of the investigation, Assange said, "The charges are without basis and their issue at this moment is deeply disturbing."
The preliminary investigation was discontinued by Finné on 25 August, but two days later Claes Borgström, the attorney representing the two women, requested a review of the prosecutor's decision to terminate part of the investigation.
On 30 August, Assange was questioned by the Stockholm police regarding the allegations of sexual molestation. He denied the allegations, saying he had consensual sexual encounters with the two women.
On 1 September 2010, Överåklagare (Director of Public Prosecution) Marianne Ny decided to resume the preliminary investigation concerning all of the original allegations.
On 18 August 2010, Assange applied for a work and residence permit in Sweden. On 18 October 2010, his request was denied. He left Sweden on 27 September 2010. The Swedish authorities have asserted that this is the same day that they notified Assange's lawyer of his imminent arrest.
On 18 November 2010, the Stockholm District Court ordered Assange detained in absentia, on request by prosecutor Marianne Ny. As basis for the ruling, the court stated Julian Assange to be suspected on reasonable grounds to have committed våldtäkt, olaga tvång, and three cases of sexuellt ofredande — which has been variously translated as "sexual molestation", "sexual assault", "sexual misconduct", "sexual annoyance", "sexual unfreedom", "sexual misdemeanour", and "sexual harassment".
As special reasons for the detention, the court named a risk of the suspect absconding or avoiding justice; that the penalty for the alleged crimes is at least two years imprisonment; and the lack of any obvious reason not to detain.
The decision was appealed by Assange on 22 November to the Svea Court of Appeal, which two days later upheld the warrant but lowered it to suspicion of rape of a lesser degree, unlawful coercion and two cases of sexual molestation rather than three. On 30 November Assange appealed to the Supreme Court of Sweden which decided not to consider a further appeal as no principle was at stake.
First instance proceedings
Detention and bail
Assange presented himself to the Metropolitan Police the next morning and was remanded to London's Wandsworth Prison.  On 16 December, he was granted bail with bail conditions of residence at Ellingham Hall, Norfolk, and wearing of an electronic tag. Bail was set at £240,000 surety with a deposit of £200,000 ($312,700).
On release on bail, Assange said "I hope to continue my work and continue to protest my innocence in this matter," and told the BBC, "This has been a very successful smear campaign and a very wrong one." He claimed that the extradition proceedings to Sweden were "actually an attempt to get me into a jurisdiction which will then make it easier to extradite me to the US." Swedish prosecutors have denied the case has anything to do with WikiLeaks.
The extradition hearing took place on 7–8 and 11 February 2011 before the City of Westminster Magistrates' Court sitting at Belmarsh Magistrates' Court in London. Assange's lawyers at the extradition hearing were Geoffrey Robertson QC and Mark Stephens (solicitor), human rights specialists, and the prosecution was represented by a team led by Clare Montgomery QC. Arguments were presented as to whether the Swedish prosecutor had the authority to issue a European Arrest Warrant, the extradition was requested for prosecution or interrogation, the alleged crimes qualified as extradition crimes, there was an abuse of process, his human rights would be respected, and he would receive a fair trial if extradited to Sweden.
The outcome of the hearing was announced on 24 February 2011, when the extradition warrant was upheld. Senior District Judge Howard Riddle found against Assange on each of the main arguments against his extradition. The judge said "as a matter of fact, and looking at all the circumstances in the round, this person (Mr Assange) passes the threshold of being an accused person and is wanted for prosecution." Judge Riddle concluded: "I am satisfied that the specified offences are extradition offences."
Assange commented after the decision to extradite him, saying "It comes as no surprise but is nevertheless wrong. It comes as the result of a European arrest warrant system run amok."
Appeal to the High Court
On 2 March 2011, Assange's lawyers lodged an appeal with the High Court challenging the decision to extradite him to Sweden. Assange remained on conditional bail. The appeal hearing took place on 12 and 13 July 2011 at the High Court in London. The judges' decision was reserved, and a written judgment was delivered on 2 November 2011, dismissing the appeal.
Appeal to the Supreme Court
The High Court refused permission to appeal to the Supreme Court, but this was granted by the Supreme Court itself, after the High Court certified that a point of law of general public importance was involved in its decision.
The point of law certified was whether the wording Judicial Authority in the 2003 Extradition Act was to be interpreted as a “person who is competent to exercise judicial authority and that such competence requires impartiality and independence of both the executive and the parties” or if it “embraces a variety of bodies, some of which have the qualities of impartiality and independence …and some of which do not.” 
The court granted Assange two weeks to make an application to reopen the appeal after his counsel argued the judgments of the majority relied on an interpretation of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties that was not argued during the hearing. The application was rejected on 14 June, thereby exhausting Assange's legal options in the United Kingdom.
Ecuador asylum request
|Wikinews has related news: Assange seeks asylum in Ecuadorian embassy|
Since 19 June 2012, Assange has lived in the Embassy of Ecuador in London, where he asked for and was granted political asylum. Assange has claimed he would go to Sweden if provided with a diplomatic guarantee that he would not be turned over to the United States but the Swedish foreign ministry stated that Sweden's legislation does not allow any judicial decision like extradition to be predetermined.
Assange has not yet been formally charged with any offence. The prosecutor said that, in accordance with the Swedish legal system, formal charges will be laid only after extradition and a second round of questioning. In sworn written testimony which she submitted to the Westminster Magistrates' court for Assange's hearing, she stated: "Subject to any matters said by him, which undermine my present view that he should be indicted, an indictment will be launched with the court thereafter. It can therefore be seen that Assange is sought for the purpose of conducting criminal proceedings and that he is not sought merely to assist with our enquiries."
On 16 September 2012 it was reported that no DNA material could be secured from the condom provided by one of the accusers as evidence. However, neither Assange nor either of the women dispute that they respectively had sexual intercourse.
- "Judicial Sittings For Hilary Term", Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (2012) p. 4.
- "Chronology". Swedish Prosecution Authority. Retrieved 28 November 2012.
- "Supreme Court Protocoll". http://undermattan.com. Retrieved 2012-11-28.
- "Julian Assange wins right to pursue extradition fight". The BBC. 5 December 2011. Retrieved 13 December 2011.
- Assange extradition case is heard by Supreme Court
- "Julian Assange loses extradition appeal at Supreme Court". BBC News. 30 May 2012. Retrieved 30 May 2012.
- "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange questioned by police". The Guardian. 31 August 2010.
- "Tell-All on WikiLeaks' Assange Coming out in March". ABC News. 18 February 2011. Retrieved 19 February 2011.
- "Wikileaks' Assange appeals over Sweden arrest warrant". BBC News. 1 December 2010. Retrieved 19 February 2011.
- Cody, Edward (9 September 2010). "WikiLeaks stalled by Swedish inquiry into allegations of rape by founder Assange". The Washington Post. Retrieved 9 September 2010.
- "Sex accusers boasted about their 'conquest' of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange". The Times of India. 9 December 2009. Retrieved 10 December 2010.
- "Swedish rape warrant for Wikileaks' Assange cancelled". BBC. 21 August 2010.
- Davies, Caroline (22 August 2010). "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange denies rape allegations". The Guardian. Retrieved 19 February 2011.
- "Timeline: sexual allegations against Assange in Sweden".
- "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange questioned by police". The Guardian. 31 August 2010. Retrieved 19 February 2011.
- Leigh, David; Harding, Luke; Hirsch, Afua; MacAskill, Ewen (30 November 2010). "WikiLeaks: Interpol issues wanted notice for Julian Assange". The Guardian. Retrieved 1 December 2010.
- "Assange charges: Consensual sex or rape?". msnbc.com. 8 December 2010. Retrieved 19 February 2011.
- "Chronology - Aklagarmyndigheten". Aklagare.se. 2010-12-07. Retrieved 2011-03-29.
- "Timeline: sexual allegations against Assange in Sweden". BBC News. 2010-12-16. Retrieved 2011-03-29.
- "Assange denied Swedish residence permit". The Local - Sweden. 18 October. Retrieved 5 March 2011.
- "Rundle: timeline of Assange’s visit to Sweden and events that followed". Crikey. Retrieved 2011-03-29.
- Esther Addley (8 February 2011). "Julian Assange's accusers sent texts discussing revenge, court hears". Guardian. Retrieved 2011-03-12.
- Whalen, Jeanne (8 February 2011). "Sweden Questions Assange's Departure". The Wall Street Journal.
- "Chronology: Events concerning Julian Assange in chronological order". Åklagarmyndigheten. Retrieved 14 February 2011.
- Hosenball, Mark (7 December 2010). "Special Report: STD fears sparked case against WikiLeaks boss". Reuters. Retrieved 2011-03-29.
- In the Certified European Arrest Warrant of 6 December 2010
- In the Extradition Ruling of 24 February 2011
- Vinthagen Simpson, Peter (24 November 2010). "Swedish court rejects Assange appeal". The Local. Retrieved 20 February 2011.
- "Did he or didn't he? The murky politics of sex and consent". Theage.com.au. 2010-12-12. Retrieved 2011-05-14.
- Mackey, Robert (2010-08-23). "Swedish Prosecutor Hopes to Conclude Investigation of WikiLeaks Founder Soon - NYTimes.com". Thelede.blogs.nytimes.com. Retrieved 2011-05-14.
- "Court of Appeal Protocoll". http://undermattan.com. Retrieved 2012-11-28.
- "Hovrätten fastställer häktningsbeslut". www.aklagare.se. 2010-11-24. Retrieved 2011-03-29.
- Verkaik, Robert (7 December 2010). "Arrest warrant on Assange to be served today". The Independent. Retrieved 19 February 2011.
- Addley, Esther (17 December 2010). "Q&A: Julian Assange allegations". The Guardian. Retrieved 19 February 2011.
- Swedish Judicial Authority v Julian Assange,  EWHC 3473 (Admin), 2010 WL 5093971
- "Extradition part of 'smear campaign': Assange". The Local. 17 December 2010. Retrieved 20 February 2011.
- Coles, Isabel; Ormsby, Avril (16 December 2010). "WikiLeaks' Assange walks free on bail in London". Thomson Reuters. Retrieved 16 December 2010.
- Ormsby, Avril (17 December 2010). "WikiLeaks' Julian Assange says he is victim of smear campaign". The Vancouver Sun. Retrieved 20 February 2011.
- "Besieged Assange hires PR team". The Sydney Morning Herald. 8 January 2011. Retrieved 8 January 2011.
- Addley, Esther (11 January 2011). "WikiLeaks: Julian Assange 'faces execution or Guantánamo detention'". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 January 2011.
- "Lawyer: WikiLeaks Founder Cannot Get Fair Trial in Sweden". Voice of America. 11 February 2011. Retrieved 11 February 2011.
- Dodd, Vikram (8 December 2010). "Julian Assange extradition attempt an uphill struggle, says specialist". The Guardian. Retrieved 19 February 2011.
- Jeffery, Simon (8 February 2011). "Julian Assange extradition hearing – final day live updates". The Guardian. Retrieved 11 February 2011.
- "Wikileaks founder Julian Assange refused bail". BBC News. 8 December 2010. Retrieved 8 December 2010.
- Coleman, Clive (24 February 2011). "Wikileaks' Julian Assange handed 'resounding defeat'". BBC News. Retrieved 25 February 2011.
- Addley, Esther; Topping, Alexandra (24 February 2011). "Julian Assange attacks 'rubber-stamp' warrant as he loses extradition battle". The Guardian. Retrieved 25 February 2011.
- Meikle, James (3 March 2011). "Julian Assange lodges extradition appeal". The Guardian. Retrieved 5 March 2011.
- Gordon, PA, Cathy (3 March). "WikiLeaks' Assange appeals against UK extradition". Reuters. Retrieved 5 March 2011.
- Assange v. Swedish Prosecution Authority  EWHC 2849 (Admin)
- "Assange case set for July". The Independent. 7 April 2011. Retrieved 9 April 2011.
- "Wikileaks' Julian Assange extradition decision deferred". BBC News. 13 July 2011.
- Booth, Robert; Addley, Esther (28 October 2011). "Julian Assange extradition judgment due on Wednesday". The Guardian.
- "Supreme court judgement". the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. 2012-05-30. Retrieved 2012-12-04.
- Owen, Paul (2 February 2012). "Julian Assange extradition appeal at supreme court - Thursday 2 February". The Guardian.
- Assange v The Swedish Judicial Authority  UKSC 22
- "Further statement – Julian Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority," United Kingdom Supreme Court, 30 May 2012. Accessed 30 May 2012.
- Julian Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority: Application to re-open appeal, Supreme Court, 14 June 2012. Accessed 18 March 2014.
- "Assange loses final legal bid to block extradition to Sweden," Zee News, 14 June 2012. Accessed 14 June 2012.
- Reuters, 19.06.2012
- AFP (24 June 2012). "WikiLeaks founder wants guarantee he won't be sent to US". Agence France-Presse. Retrieved 16 August 2012.
- Guardian, September 2012
- Nick Davies (17 December 2010). "10 days in Sweden: the full allegations against Julian Assange". Guardian. Retrieved 2011-03-11.
- "City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court - The judicial authority in Sweden -v- Julian Paul Assange".
- RT (16 September 2012). "No DNA link to Assange in condom central to sex assault case". RT. Retrieved 17 September 2012.
- Daily Mail (16 September 2012). "ondom used as evidence in Assange sex case 'does not contain his DNA". Daily Mail. Retrieved 19 September 2012.
- SwedenVersusAssange.com - extensive information on the case from the Committee to Defend Julian Assange
- Assange in Sweden: The Police Protocol (Translated)
- The judicial authority in Sweden-v-Julian Paul Assange - Findings of facts and reasons - judiciary.gov.uk - 24 February 2011
- "Legal Myths About Assange Extradition" from the New Statesman
- "Assange and Legal Myths"