The whistleblowing website WikiLeaks said last night it
would not to be gagged by the imprisonment of its founder, Julian Assange, after a judge refused him bail at a dramatic extradition
hearing in London.
Assange who is wanted in Sweden over claims he
'sexually assaulted' two women, was in Wandsworth prison last night
after district judge Howard Riddle claimed there was a risk he would
fail to surrender if granted bail. Assange denies the allegations.
Despite Jemima Khan, former wife of Pakistan cricket
captain Imran Khan, the campaigning journalist John Pilger, the film
director Ken Loach and others offering to stand surety totalling
£180,000, the judge said the Australian Assange's weak
community ties in the UK, and his means and ability to
abscond, represented substantial grounds for refusing bail.
He was remanded until 14 December, when the case can
be reviewed at the same court. His legal team said he would again apply
for bail at that hearing.
Last night Kristinn Hrafnsson, a spokesman for
WikiLeaks, confirmed it would continue publishing US diplomatic cables.
In a statement he said: This will not stifle WikiLeaks. The release
of the US embassy cables – the biggest leak in history – will still
continue. We will not be gagged, either by judicial action or corporate
censorship.
The refusal to grant Assange bail came on a day when
increasing pressure was brought to bear in the US on companies and
organisations with ties to WikiLeaks. As Joe Lieberman, chairman of the
Senate's homeland security committee, urged businesses to sever their
ties with the website, Visa suspended the payment of donations to the
website through its credit card.
Michael Mukasey, a former US attorney general, said
last night that American lawyers should try to extradite Assange to the
US for betraying government secrets. Mukasey implied that the Swedish
sexual accusations may only be a holding charge. When one is
accused of a very serious crime, he said, it's common to hold
him in respect of a lesser crime … while you assemble evidence of a
second crime.
After the ruling – with supporters waving A4 printouts
reading Character Assassination and Protect Free Speech
– his solicitor, Mark Stephens, emerged from court to claim the
prosecution was politically motivated and pledged WikiLeaks
would not be cowed. Assange was entitled to a high court appeal, he
said, adding the judge was impressed with the number of people
prepared to stand up on his client's behalf. [Those
supporters] were but the tip of the iceberg, he said. This is
going to go viral. Many people believe Mr Assange to be innocent,
myself included. Many people believe that this prosecution is
politically motivated.
Assange was arrested by appointment at a London police
station at 9.20am after a European arrest warrant was received by the
Metropolitan police extradition unit. He appeared in court at 2pm,
where he spoke to confirm his name and date of birth and to tell the
court: I do not consent to my extradition.
Update: Britain not Sweden opposes bail
16th December 2010. Based on article
from guardian.co.uk
The decision to have Julian Assange sent to a London
jail and kept there was taken by the British authorities and not by
prosecutors in Sweden, as previously thought, the Guardian has learned.
The Crown Prosecution Service will go to the high
court tomorrow to seek the reversal of a decision to free the WikiLeaks
founder on bail, made yesterday by a judge at City of Westminster
magistrates court.
It had been widely thought Sweden had made the
decision to oppose bail, with the CPS acting merely as its
representative. But today the Swedish prosecutor's office told the
Guardian it had not got a view at all on bail and that Britain
had made the decision to oppose bail.
Lawyers for Assange reacted to the news with shock and
said CPS officials had told them this week it was Sweden which had
asked them to ensure he was kept in prison.
Karin Rosander, director of communications for
Sweden's prosecutor's office, told the Guardian: The decision was
made by the British prosecutor. I got it confirmed by the CPS this
morning that the decision to appeal the granting of bail was entirely a
matter for the CPS. The Swedish prosecutors are not entitled to make
decisions within Britain. It is entirely up to the British authorities
to handle it.
Update: Bail granted
17th December 2010. bbc.co.uk
Based on article
from bbc.co.uk
The founder of whistle-blowing website Wikileaks,
Julian Assange, has vowed to continue my work and to protest my
innocence after being freed on bail.
Mr Justice Ouseley ordered Assange be released on
payment of £240,000 in cash and sureties and on condition he
resides at an address in East Anglia.
Assange's solicitor, Mark Stephens, said after the
court appearance the bail appeal was part of a continuing vendetta
by the Swedes.
Assange is accused of having unprotected sex with a
woman, identified only as Miss A, when she insisted he use a condom. He
is also accused of the unlikely sounding offence of having unprotected
sex with another woman, Miss W, while she was asleep.
The judge imposed strict bail conditions including
wearing an electronic tag, reporting to police every day, observing a
curfew and residing at a specified residence.
A full extradition hearing should normally take place
within 21 days of the arrest. Mr Assange was arrested on 7 December, so
this should be by 28 December. However, in such a high profile case, it
is possible that a full extradition hearing will not take place for
several months.
Update: Weak Case
6th February 2011. See article
from telegraph.co.uk
Rape case against the WikiLeaks chief weak
Details in a police file of the rape case against Julian
Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, reveal a series of apparent
contradictions and inconsistencies in the evidence against him.
Assange faces extradition to Sweden on a European Arrest
Warrant. He has not been charged but is wanted for further
questioning.
Mark Stephens, Mr Assange's lawyer, said: This is the
third time people have sought to prejudice the outcome of Julian
Assange's case by leaking information.
Kirsty Brimelow, a barrister asked by Stephens to
independently review the evidence against Assange, said: I do
not consider that the evidence would reach the charge threshold
in this country; let alone sustain a prosecution.
Update: Automatic Extradition
28th February 2011. See article
from telegraph.co.uk
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has criticised the unjust
European arrest warrant system after a judge ruled he should be
extradited to Sweden to face sex offence charges.
The ruling against him came as a result of a European
arrest warrant system run amok, he claimed.
He said: There was no consideration during this entire
process as to the merit of the allegations made against me, no
consideration or examination of even the complaints made in
Sweden and of course we have always known we would appeal.
Launching into a criticism of the system, he said 95% of
European arrest warrants were successful and he welcomed a
pending review of UK extradition procedures due in June.
Update: Extradited
6th November 2011. See article
from huffingtonpost.co.uk
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has lost his High Court bid
to block extradition to Sweden, where he faces rape allegations.
Lord Justice Thomas and Justice Ouseley said that Assange
must return to Sweden on a European arrest warrant to face rape
and sexual assault allegations made by two Swedish women after a
visit to Stockholm in August 2010.
The Australian could now be sent to Sweden within 10 days,
unless as expected he decides to appeal the decision.