2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: Kim Dotcom: Julian Assange Will Be Hillary Clinton’s Worst Nightmare in 2016 [View all]AntiBank
(1,339 posts)against Assange here in the US.
I live in Stockholm, I know this case like the back of my hand.
Swedens argument for refusing to issue non-extradition guarantees to Mr Assange is fallacious and hides real commitment to the U.S.
The Indicter, Vol 2, Nr 31, 20 February 2016
By Prof Marcello Ferrada de Noli PhD.
Chairman of Swedish Doctors for Human Rights and of The Indicters Editorial board.
http://theindicter.com/swedens-argument-for-refusing-to-issue-non-extradition-guarantees-to-mr-assange-is-fallacious-and-hides-real-commitment-to-the-u-s-analysis/
In fact, the former chairman of the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD), the Norwegian jurist Mads Andenas who worked with the case Assange since the beginning has recently declared that the panel came under considerable political pressure from the US and UK when compiling their report.
Why would the US government put pressure against the release of Mr Assange, if not for the reason they want the Swedish arrest warrant against Julian Assange shall be fulfilled, ergo, that Mr Assange should end under custody of Swedens authorities? What other reason the US is having for this, if not for it would made possible the implementation of the indictment against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks? [1] [2]
For the above, the obvious is that Sweden would have to extradite the WikiLeaks founder. However, the Swedish government refuses to give guarantees. For instance, Fmr Foreign Minister Carl Bildt declared to Human-Rights lawyer Jennifer Robinson that Sweden couldnt give that guarantee; that its a judicial process. [3]
And against the backdrop that Mr Assange has been called terrorist by the Vice President of the US [See down below], [4] it is necessary to clarify once for all what is the record of Sweden with regards to the US on matters of legal and of extra-court extraditions, including renditions. As seen below, the judge who chaired the committee on Swedens extradition-law revealed recently that the (Swedish) anti-terrorism law gives the government wide discretion. [5]
Contrary to speculations by Swedish scholars [See my rebuttal to a comment sent by Assoc. Professor Mark Klamberg to The Professor Blog] [6] or disinformation spread by a monopoly Swedish press, [7] a fact-based analysis demonstrates that the extradition of Mr Assange by Sweden to the US is not only juridical feasible, but most certain to happen, provided he will be taken to custody in Swedish territory. Corollary to the juridical (and extra-juridical) feasibility of a prospective extradition of Mr Julian Assange to the U.S. feasible, the analysis shows that Swedens stance on the legal impossibility of giving non-extradition guarantees is fallacious.
1. Introduction
Montesquieus principle on democratic separation of powers has been made in Sweden a sad charade around the Assange case. And at this stage, no one, nowhere, would insist that this is not a true political case.
Besides the political motivations and geopolitical interests behind the prosecution of Assange, the request to Sweden from the U.S. government, etc., analyzed in my article Sweden doesnt follow U.N., but U.S. Prosecution of Assange requested by the US, Snowden document reveals, we witness the spectacle of statements on the juridical status of the case consistently made by the government representatives not by the independent judiciary or prosecutor carrying our the legal case.
snip