Swedish judge says US extradition unlikely if Assange shows

 

Original URL:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/04/assange_extradition_unlikely/

 

 

Swedish judge says US extradition unlikely if Assange shows

 

Judge explains leaker's bonking behaviour, likely legal escapes

 

By Simon Sharwood, APAC Editor

 

Posted in Law, 4th April 2013 03:14 GMT

 

A senior judge from Sweden's supreme court, Justice Stefan Lindskog, has

told an Australian audience that Julian Assange's argument he cannot stand

trial in Sweden without being extradited to the USA is not as black and

white as the wikileaker would have us believe.

 

Lindskog yesterday told an audience at the University of Adelaide that

unless Assange is charged with a crime that directly correlates to a law on

the books of both Sweden and the USA, the Scandinavian nation won't be able

to hand him over.

 

A video of Lindskog's talk is online here [1]. At about the 25:00 mark he

explains some rather lurid details of events that took place inside

Stockholm bedrooms and have since become so contentious that Assange last

year holed up in Ecuador's London embassy. Assange remains there to this

day, reportedly because he fears he cannot get a fair trial in Sweden. The

leaker-in-chief has also said that once in Sweden he will be charged with

other crimes by the USA and extradited to face those charges. Assange has

said the US charges could carry the death penalty.

 

Starting at the 51:00 mark in the talk, Lindskog addresses the theory that

facing trial in Sweden will mean extradition to the USA, and almost

dismisses it.

 

"Extradition is permitted provided the offence for which extradition is

requested is equivalent to a crime punishable under Swedish law by

imprisonment of at least one year," Lindskog says. "Thus, extradition

requires firstly an offence punishable under the law of both countries -

dual criminality - and secondly that the offence is of a certain degree of

seriousness."

 

Lindskog also says "extradition may not be granted for military or political

offences" and explains that Swedish law won't permit extradition if the

subject of such a request is likely to experience persecution or "is serious

in any other respects" or is contrary to fundamental humanitarian

principles".

 

"We have some specifics when it comes to extradition to the United States,"

Lindskog added, including prohibitions on extradition for political or

military acts.

 

Lindskog then says he doesn't know what crimes Assange could be charged with

in the USA for leaking US secrets and hypothesises unlawful communication of

secret material will be the basis of any charge. Sweden does have such an

offence on its books, but "it can be debated" leaking American documents is

not a crime under Swedish Law. Even "aiding the enemy" provisions of US and

Swedish laws may be hard, as the USA's enemies are not necessarily Sweden's

enemies. Nor is Lindskog satisfied that publishing secret documents to the

world constitutes aiding the enemy, possibly making it hard to establish

dual criminality.

 

Another legal issue is the source privilege that protects journalists from

having to reveal their sources. Lindskog says the law is unclear on whether

Assange can enjoy that protection.

 

Lindskog doesn't say so explicitly, but his talk certainly outlines there

are many legal barriers to be overcome before the USA could extract Assange.

 

His personal view, enunciated at aoud 1:04:30, is that Assange has done good

works.

 

"At the end of the day Assange will be thought of as someone who made public

certain pieces of information," Lindskog says, adding that he feels many of

Wikileaks' leaks "were good for society and should not be punished."

 

"The good made by leakage of such information cannot be underestimated," he

says. "It should never be a crime to make known the crime of a state."

 

If the extradition case comes before Lindskog, it seems Assange may have a

sympathetic ear. R

Links

 

 

http://www.adelaide.edu.au/live/?utm_source=hootsuite&utm_medium=uniofadelai

de&utm_campaign=socialmedia

 

 

==========================================

(F)AIR USE NOTICE: All original content and/or articles and graphics in this

message are copyrighted, unless specifically noted otherwise. All rights to

these copyrighted items are reserved. Articles and graphics have been placed

within for educational and discussion purposes only, in compliance with

"Fair Use" criteria established in Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976.

The principle of "Fair Use" was established as law by Section 107 of The

Copyright Act of 1976. "Fair Use" legally eliminates the need to obtain

permission or pay royalties for the use of previously copyrighted materials

if the purposes of display include "criticism, comment, news reporting,

teaching, scholarship, and research." Section 107 establishes four criteria

for determining whether the use of a work in any particular case qualifies

as a "fair use". A work used does not necessarily have to satisfy all four

criteria to qualify as an instance of "fair use". Rather, "fair use" is

determined by the overall extent to which the cited work does or does not

substantially satisfy the criteria in their totality. If you wish to use

copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' you

must obtain permission from the copyright owner. For more information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

 

THIS DOCUMENT MAY CONTAIN COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL. COPYING AND DISSEMINATION IS

PROHIBITED WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS.