Activists slam UN ruling on Assange

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's three-and-a-half-year stay in the Ecuadorian embassy amounts to "unlawful detention", a UN panel will rule, the BBC reported. Picture: Reutes/ Paul Hackett/Files

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's three-and-a-half-year stay in the Ecuadorian embassy amounts to "unlawful detention", a UN panel will rule, the BBC reported. Picture: Reutes/ Paul Hackett/Files

Published Feb 5, 2016

Share

Anti-rape campaigners on Thursday condemned as “irrelevant” a finding by a United Nations panel that Julian Assange's lengthy stay in the Ecuador's London embassy amounts to “arbitrary detention” and called on the WikiLeaks founder to surrender to the legal process.

Mr Assange, who has lived in the diplomatic mission since seeking sanctuary in 2012, appealed to the UN's Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) in an attempt to break the legal deadlock over his efforts to avoid extradition to Sweden to face questioning about a claim of rape. He has always denied any assault.

In a move likely to rankle the Government, which has spent more than £12m on a police operation outside the embassy, the five human rights lawyers on the UN panel are expected to announce that they have found in Mr Assange's favour by deciding he has been unlawfully detained despite voluntarily entering the building three and a half years ago.

The WikiLeaks chief had argued that his confinement was unlawful because he was being asked to choose between the asylum granted to him by the Ecuadorian government and the certainty of arrest if he left the embassy.

Lawyers for Mr Assange said they were still awaiting official confirmation of the WGAD finding due for release this morning but said if confirmed the extradition proceedings issued by Sweden should be immediately revoked and Scotland Yard should announce he no longer faces arrest.

Although the UN panel's decision is not formally binding on either the British or Swedish governments, his legal team believe it will be difficult for either to ignore and hands him a significant public relations victory.

One of his British lawyers said Mr Assange may seek safe passage to Ecuador.

The WikiLeaks chief, who has said he will answer questions from Swedish prosecutors put to him via Ecuadorian diplomats, believes he faces eventual extradition to America to face prosecution over the publication of thousands of US diplomatic cables and military files if he is sent to Sweden.

But campaigners said they believed Mr Assange, who faces no formal charge in Sweden, was putting himself above a lawful process after the Swedish authorities said they wanted to question him about an allegation of rape made in 2010.

Further allegations of lesser sexual offences against another woman can no longer be pursued after the statute of limitations expired.

Joan Smith, chairwoman of the Mayor of London's Violence Against Women and Girls Board, said: “The UN ruling is completely irrelevant. Mr Assange is subject to the same lawful process that the rest of us are and the Supreme Court has found the arrest warrant against him was valid.

“In my view he has been desperately seeking to avoid submitting himself to this process by claiming there is a plot against him. He should be co-operating with a lawful process.”

Downing Street declined to comment on the finding but insisted that Britain continued to have a legal obligation to put the Swedish arrest warrant into effect.

THE UN PANEL - WHAT IS ITS AUTHORITY?

What is the UN panel?

The Geneva-based WGAD was set up in 1991 and consists of a panel of senior lawyers and academics.

How could it apply to Julian Assange in Britain?

His lawyers argue the scale, duration and nature of the police operation to monitor him in the embassy is depriving him of key liberties.

Does this finding have any legal force in Britain?

The WGAD's opinions do not come from a judicial authority.

What will happen next?

It is unlikely either London or Stockholm will let Mr Assange walk free. One possibility is that he takes a case to the European Court of Human Rights.

The Independent

Related Topics: