Julian Assange still faces arrest if he leaves the Ecuadorian embassy in London after a court ruled a warrant against him was still valid.
The WikiLeaks founder applied to have a warrant for skipping bail quashed, which would free him to leave the embassy, where he has hidden since June 2012, without fear of arrest.
Swedish prosecutors had already dropped their investigation over sexual assault and rape allegations, which he denies.
Westminster Magistrates’ Court previously heard the 46-year-old was suffering from depression, a frozen shoulder and painful toothache after hiding out in the embassy since 2012.
He claimed being extradited to Sweden would see him removed to the US over WikiLeaks’ publication of war logs and diplomatic cables.
Assange’s lawyer Mark Summers had previously told the court the bail arrest warrant had “lost its purpose and its function” when Sweden withdrew the European Arrest Warrant (EAW).
But Crown Prosecution Service lawyer Aaron Watkins told the court it would be “absurd” if a defendant was effectively rewarded for managing to evade proceedings for sufficiently long that they fell away.
Watkins said the case against Assange was “extremely simple” in that he had failed to surrender to custody in answer to bail, therefore the warrant still stood.
When asked if a successful ruling would mean Assange was free to leave the embassy, a CPS spokesman said: “Hypothetically yes, that would be our interpretation.”
On Tuesday, the court ruled the warrant is still valid.
Chief Magistrate Emma Arbuthnot said legal precedents “underline the importance of a defendant attending court when bail to do so,” adding: “I am not persuaded that the warrant should be withdrawn.”
She added it was “not uncommon” for people to be pursued for bail offences after the proceedings the bail related to were discontinued.
Assange tweeted to condemn “wall to wall fake news stating the government won today’s hearing”, insisting his legal team was still fighting the warrant on other grounds.
The judge is now considering written submissions from Assange’s lawyers on other grounds.
A crowd of journalists gathered outside the embassy ahead of the verdict but no supporters seem to have turned up when HuffPost UK arrived.
Assange walked into the embassy seeking asylum after he fought extradition through the English courts.
His time there has been marked by regular appearances at the embassy’s balcony to address crowds of supporters, who have gathered at various stages of his legal battle.
For three years, the Metropolitan Police maintained a permanent guard outside the embassy in case he left, but stopped this in 2015, citing the cost.
In 2016, a UN panel called on Swedish and British authorities to end Assange’s “deprivation of liberty”.
The Foreign Office condemned this, saying it “completely rejects any claim that Julian Assange is a victim of arbitrary detention”.
It added Assange was “in fact, voluntarily avoiding lawful arrest by choosing to remain in the Ecuadorean embassy”.
In May last year, Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny said she was withdrawing the EAW because Assange’s refusal to come to Sweden meant “all possibilities to advance the investigation have now been exhausted”.
This meant bail warrant was the only thing keeping Assange in the embassy.
Extradition lawyer Edward Grange said of Tuesday’s ruling: “Today’s decision results in a continuation of the impasse...
“The Metropolitan police will continue to be obliged to arrest Assange should he set foot outside the Embassy.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.