London:Julian Assange has suffered enough and shouldnt face prison for absconding from justice, his lawyers have told a court.

The Wikileaks editor is depressed, in constant pain from an infected tooth, and has been stuck in the Ecuador Embassy in Londons Kensington far longer than the maximum 12-month jail penalty for breaching bail, his barrister said.

On Tuesday Assange lost a legal bid at Westminster Magistrates Court to quash the arrest warrant that has awaited him since he entered the Ecuador embassy in June 2012.

However his lawyers immediately launched a new push to end the UK governments attempt to bring him to justice arguing that it is against the public interest to punish him for refusing to leave the embassy.

It is a criminal offence for someone on bail to refuse to surrender to police without reasonable cause and Assange refused to leave the embassy despite a court order for his arrest.

But Assanges barrister Mark Summers QC told Judge Emma Arbuthnot that it was not in the interests of justice and proportionality to bring an action against Assange.

Assange went into the embassy after he exhausted his line of appeal against a decision to extradite him to Sweden to face rape allegations.

Get the latest news and updates emailed straight to your inbox.

Sweden last year ended its investigation into the allegations, and the European arrest warrant against Assange was cancelled. However the British warrant for his arrest still stood and judge Arbuthnot said she was not persuaded it should be quashed simply because the underlying investigation had stopped.

Mr Summers said Assange was not thumbing his nose at justice and his five and a half years in the embassy were adequate if not severe punishment for the actions that he took.

Assange had genuine fears later proved correct that the US were keen to prosecute him over his work with Wikileaks, Summers said.

If arrested he would face rendition to the USA, treatment similar to that meted out against Wikileaks whistleblower Chelsea Manning and possible persecution, indefinite solitary confinement and the death penalty, Summers said in a written submission.

Former army private Chelsea Manning, who spent seven years in military prison for leaking classified documents to Wikileaks, recently announced she is running for a seat in the US Senate.

The FBI director had recently told Congress Assange would be arrested as soon as he stepped outside the embassy, and there was a sealed indictment against him, Summers told the court.

A United Nations tribunal had ruled that Assanges situation amounted to arbitrary, unreasonable, unnecessary and disproportionate detention.

Mr Summers also argued that it was not Assanges fault the Swedish investigation had dragged on so long. Sweden had decided to drop its arrest warrant in 2012, but emails uncovered by an Italian journalists Freedom of Information request had revealed that a British prosecution lawyer persuaded them to insist that Assange leave the embassy.

He also submitted a medical report about Assanges deteriorating health.

Judge Arbuthnot said the health issues were not that bad, but he had a real problem with a tooth (which) must be agonising.

Summers said Assange was in constant pain, regularly suffered respiratory infections and had significant depression.

The issue is whether he has been punished enough for what he did, Summers said.

Judge Arbuthnot said it was a very interesting case.

She will rule on the public interest application on February 13.

Outside court, Assanges lawyer Jennifer Robinson said whether or not the warrant is quashed Assange would not leave the embassy until he had an assurance he wouldnt be extradited to the US.

Mr Assange remains willing to answer to British justice in relation to any argument about breaching bail, but not at the expense of facing injustice in America, she said.

This case is and always has been about the risk of extradition to the United States and that risk remains real.

Ecuadors Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement on Tuesday saying the government of Ecuador would maintain international protection for Assange as long as the danger to his life persists and they were still trying to find a satisfactory solution to the situation.

Link:
Julian Assange 'has suffered enough', his lawyers tell ...

JULIAN Assange has been granted a final crack at freedom after a judge agreed to consider whether a 2012 arrest warrant against him should be dropped on public interest grounds.

And, a tumlutous day for the whistleblower has culminated with police swooping on the Ecuadorean Embassy in London to investigate a suspicious package.

I can confirm that a package containing an unknown white powdery substance and a threat was addressed to my name, Assange wrote on Twitter.

It was handed to UK diplomatic police. I understand they are performing toxicology and forensics.

Local police said the item is being assessed by specialist officers. There are no reported injuries.

Assanges last-minute legal request came after Judge Emma Arbuthnot declined an earlier call to have the UK arrest warrant for skipping bail withdrawn.

The sole issue for me to consider at this stage is whether the warrant issued ... can remain in force when the extradition proceedings have terminated, she told Westminster Magistrates Court on Tuesday.

Having considered the arguments set out ... I am not persuaded that the warrant should be withdrawn.

READ FULL JUDGEMENT HERE

However in a late courtroom twist, Mr Assanges lawyer, Mark Summers QC requested the court consider public interest issues and whether a ruling could be made in his absence rather than wait for his physical surrender due to the exceptional circumstances.

After brief consideration the judge agreed and Mr Summers went on to outline four arguments why the final outstanding warrant should be dealt with without the need for Mr Assange to show up in court.

Firstly, Mr Summers said Mr Assange had held and expressed strong fears of being removed to the US from Sweden.

He said the charges should be dealt with in his absence because the UN had ruled that his situation at present is arbitrary, unreasonable, unnecessary, disproportionate.

Thirdly, Mr Summers argued Mr Assanges decision to remain in the Ecuadorean embassy did not have the usual consequence of paralysing the underlying criminal process.

He said Mr Assange had been interviewed by Swedish authorities inside the embassy and it couldnt be further from the truth that he was waiting out charges to be dropped.

Finally, Mr Summers argued spending the last five and a half years inside the small room was adequate, if not severe punishment for Mr Assanges actions, which would receive a maximum of 12 months in jail.

He catalogued Mr Assanges health issues including depression, a frozen shoulder, a bad tooth and lack of space, despite queries from the judge over the fact he has access to a balcony and computer.

Judge Arbuthnot said she would reserve her final judgment until Tuesday 13 February at 2pm UK time.

Mr Assange, 46, has been living inside the Ecuadorean embassy since June 2012 where he took refuge to avoid extradition to Sweden.

Outside the court, Mr Assanges lawyer Jennifer Robinson said he is still seeking a guarantee he will not be extradited to the US.

Mr Assange remains willing to face British justice in relation to any argument about breach of bail but not at the expense of facing injustice in America, she said.

This case is and has always been about the risk of extradition to the United States and that risk remains real.

MORE: Assange to walk free with bitcoin fortune?

Unless that assurance is given and the UK stops insisting on neither confirming or denying the existence of [that warrant], he is at risk of extradition and that is the risk that he entered the embassy for in the very first place.

Mr Assange tweeted throughout the proceedings and accused the media of wall to wall fake news stating that the government won todays hearing as was initially the case.

Nothing of the sort has happened. The hearing is still happening. Only one point has been ruled on.

Judge has ruled against the first technical point the court now expected to hear & decide on the other points, he said.

The decision came a day after alleged hacker Lauri Love, 32, won a UK court appeal to block his extradition to the US where he faced charges in three states after allegedly stealing data from US agencies including the Department of Defense, Federal Reserve, NASA and the US Army.

Mr Love has Aspergers syndrome and depression and his lawyers argued it would be unjust and oppressive to send him to the US to face trial where he might present a suicide risk.

The UK High Court sided with Mr Love, although he could still face trial in England where he was judged to have benefited from proximity to family members.

Rebecca Niblock, an extradition expert at London law firm Kingsley Napley, told the Associated Press the High Court judgment sets a valuable precedent for future cases.

It is right for British courts to deal with individuals who are alleged to have committed crimes while in the U.K., she said.

with Ben Graham

Read more:
Julian Assange: Wikileaks founder still hopeful of having ...

Published time: 6 Feb, 2018 14:18 Edited time: 7 Feb, 2018 08:55

A British judge will rule on February 13 whether WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange can have his arrest warrant, for breaching bail conditions, lifted on public interest grounds.

Judge Emma Arbuthnot had earlier rejected a bid by Assange, who is holed up inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, to have an arrest warrant against him dropped on different grounds.

Speaking outside court, Assanges lawyer Jennifer Robinson said all of us should be resisting the threat to free speech posed by the persecution of Assange.

We hope this situation will come to an end very soon and we look forward to the decision next week, Robinson said. [The outcome on Tuesday] is not disappointing, we finally had the court understand the public interest of this case.

According to Assange, only the first technical point of his legal challenge has failed. Judges will hear and decide on the other points on Tuesday afternoon, and if Assange wins any of them, the warrant falls.

The Judicial Office tweeted the judgment on Tuesday afternoon. Senior District Judge Emma Arbuthnot said in her ruling: Having considered the arguments I am not persuaded that the warrant should be withdrawn.

Assange, 46, absconded in 2012 to enter the Ecuadorian embassy, to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault and rape. However, Swedish prosecutors have since dropped those charges.

Still, Assange has been unable to leave the embassy in London, as he faced arrest for breaching his bail conditions in the UK.

Assange's lawyer, Mark Summers, argued that the arrest warrant should be dropped because it had lost its purpose and its function, citing the dropped charges against Assange in Sweden.

[Assange] has spent five-and-a-half years in conditions which, on any view, are akin to imprisonment, without access to adequate medical care or sunlight, in circumstances where his physical and psychological health have deteriorated and are in serious peril, Summers wrote in court papers, as quoted by the Guardian.

Read more

However, Aaron Watkins, who represents the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), called Summers argument strange and untenable, adding that it was an attempt at contorting legislation to allow Assange to leave the embassy.

Assange had been released on bail in proceedings; he was under a duty to surrender to the custody of the court and he failed to surrender at the appointed time for him to do so. Therefore the warrant stands, Watkins said, calling Assanges situation extremely simple.

Assange was made an Ecuadorian citizen in December. However, the UK refused to recognize him as having diplomatic status, which would have given him legal immunity and allowed him to leave the embassy.

Even if Assange's arrest warrant has been dropped, he could have still been extradited to the US to face trial over WikiLeaks' publication of classified US military and diplomatic documents in 2010 which amounted to one of the largest information leaks in United States history.

If found guilty in a US court, Assange could face life imprisonment or possibly even the death penalty under the Espionage Act. British authorities have declined to confirm or deny if a US extradition warrant has been received.

The Wikileaks founder has consistently denied the allegations of rape and sexual assault.

Continued here:
UK judge upholds Julian Assange's arrest warrant - rt.com

Assanges lawyers react by launching new application on public interest grounds

Julian Assange will continue to face arrest if he leaves the Ecuadorian embassy, after a judge ruled that the arrest warrant against the WikiLeaks founder was still valid.

But after the senior district judge Emma Arbuthnot ruled against Assange on Tuesday, his lawyers made a separate application that the warrant should be dropped on public interest grounds, leaving open the possibility that he could still walk out of the embassy in the near future.

Assange, 46, skipped bail to enter the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault and rape, which he denies. Though Swedish prosecutors dropped the investigation against him, he faces arrest if he leaves the building in Knightsbridge, London, for breaching his former bail conditions in the UK.

In making the public interest case, Assanges lawyer, Mark Summers QC, said the punishment Assange faces was not proportionate, and therefore not in the interests of justice. Arbuthnot said that she would rule on the point on 13 February.

Assanges legal team said that the decision on Tuesday was far from final. Jennifer Robinson of Doughty Street Chambers said: For more than seven years we have been fighting to end Julian Assanges detention without charge. After today, that fight will continue until we can ensure his freedom.

We will also continue to seek assurances that the UK does not have a US extradition warrant, and will let him leave the country freely and without interference.

Hours after the decision Assange tweeted that a package containing a powdery substance and a threat had been sent to him at the embassy. The Metropolitan police confirmed it was investigating.

The judges initial decision means that Assange will continue to be confined to the embassy where he has lived for five years.

With a media throng outside, Lauri Love, the alleged hacker who was spared extradition to the US on Monday, left the embassy shortly before the decision was due to be handed down. He said he had been to visit his friend Assange to accept his congratulations. Love, who was pushing a large box on a trolley, joked that Assange was inside it.

Summers had argued to the court last month that since the Swedish case against Assange had been dropped, the warrant had lost its purpose and its function. He told Arbuthnot that because Swedish extradition proceedings against Assange had come to an end, so had the life of the arrest warrant.

But Arbuthnot rejected that argument on Tuesday, saying: Im not persuaded that the warrant should be withdrawn.

She said Assange not surrendering to bail was an offence in its own right. In front of a packed public gallery, she said: Once at court, the defendant would be given the opportunity to explain his failure to surrender and that is when Mr Assange would be able to place before the court his reasonable cause for failing to do so.

Aaron Watkins, representing the Crown Prosecution Service, said Assanges argument for having the warrant dropped was strange and untenable.

Assange had been released on bail in proceedings; he was under a duty to surrender to the custody of the court and he failed to surrender at the appointed time for him to do so. Therefore a warrant stands, Watkins said.

Assange remains concerned that he faces a secret US indictment on charges related to WikiLeaks disclosure of leaked classified US documents.

Ecuador recently granted him citizenship and asylum in an attempt to resolve the political impasse over his continued presence in the UK. It had tried unsuccessfully to persuade British officials to give Assange diplomatic status, which might have made it possible for him to leave Britain even if he was sought by US officials.

In applying for the warrant to be lifted on public interest grounds, Summers argued that Assanges actions in seeking refuge at the embassy were reasonable in the light of the perceived threat of extradition to the US, adding: I use reasonable grounds loosely ... justification is perhaps the better terminology.

Referencing a UN description of his situation as arbitrary, unreasonable, unnecessary, disproportionate, he said Swedish prosecutors were free to interview him at the embassy. He added: The last five and a half years that he has spent might be thought to be adequate if not severe punishment for the actions that he took.

Tweeting after the hearing, Assange said: We only lost the first of four points. I was never charged. My asylum was over US extradition and Sweden dropped its so-called preliminary investigation a year ago. We are arguing four points ... If we win any point the warrant falls.

View original post here:
Julian Assange still faces arrest after judge rules ...

Media playback is unsupported on your device

A UK warrant to arrest Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is still valid, a court has ruled.

The warrant was issued in 2012 after Mr Assange failed to answer bail over sex assault claims in Sweden, now dropped.

Lawyers for Mr Assange, who has been living in London's Ecuador embassy since then, argued the warrant had therefore "lost its purpose".

His lawyers went on to argue against it on other grounds and the court will rule on 13 February.

At Westminster Magistrates' Court, senior district judge and chief magistrate Emma Arbuthnot said, having considered the arguments, she was "not persuaded that the warrant should be withdrawn".

She told the court that not surrendering to bail was a stand-alone offence under the Bail Act and Mr Assange must explain why he had failed to do so.

The offence carries a maximum penalty of one year in prison.

His lawyers went on to argue that his case should be discontinued on the grounds that his treatment was not proportionate in the interests of justice.

Mr Assange's lawyer Mark Summers QC said his client had "had reasonable grounds for the course that he took".

He said the UN had ruled that Mr Assange's situation at present was "arbitrary, unreasonable and disproportionate" and his conduct in failing to answer bail had not had "the usual consequence of paralysing the underlying legal proceedings".

Mr Summers said Mr Assange had "at all times" offered to cooperate with the Swedish investigation and the five and a half years he had spent in the embassy in London "may be thought to be adequate, if not severe punishment, for the actions that he took".

Mr Assange has long feared that, if he leaves the Ecuadorean embassy and is arrested, he could then be extradited to the US to face prosecution for publishing classified information through Wikileaks.

After the hearing, his legal team said they would continue to seek assurances that the UK did not have a US extradition warrant and would let him leave the country freely and without interference.

Mr Assange later said in a tweet that he had received a package addressed to him at the embassy and containing "an unknown white powdery substance and a threat".

The Metropolitan Police confirmed specialist officers assessed a small package and it was deemed not to be suspicious.

Earlier this month the UK government refused to grant Mr Assange diplomatic status and called on him to leave the embassy and "face justice". It has refused to guarantee he will not be extradited to the US, which has said his arrest is "a priority".

Wikileaks, which was founded by Mr Assange in 2006, has been involved in several high-profile releases of classified US information.

It made headlines around the world in April 2010 when it released footage showing US soldiers shooting dead 18 civilians from a helicopter in Iraq.

Mr Assange promoted and defended the video, as well as a massive release of classified US military documents relating to the Afghan and Iraq wars in July and October 2010.

The website continued to release new documents, including five million confidential emails from US-based intelligence company Stratfor.

See the article here:
Julian Assange arrest warrant still stands, court rules ...

LONDON -- A British judge on Tuesday upheld a U.K. arrest warrant for the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, leaving his legal position unchanged after more than five years inside the Ecuadorean Embassy.

Judge Emma Arbuthnot rejected a call from Assange's lawyers for the warrant to be revoked because he is no longer wanted for questioning in Sweden.

"I am not persuaded the warrant should be withdrawn," Arbuthnot told lawyers, journalists and Assange supporters gathered at London's Westminster Magistrates' Court.

After the ruling, Assange's lawyer, Mark Summers, tried to persuade the judge to hold a further hearing on new legal arguments. She didn't immediately agree.

Assange has been holed up in the Ecuador's embassy in London since he took refuge there in June 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden. Swedish prosecutors were investigating allegations of sexual assault and rape made by two women in 2010.

Swedish prosecutors dropped the case last year, saying there was no prospect of bringing Assange to Sweden in the foreseeable future. But Assange was still subject to a British arrest warrant for jumping bail in 2012.

Had the judge ruled in Assange's favor, he would have been free to leave the embassy without being arrested on the British warrant.

However, Assange suspects there is a secret U.S. indictment against him for WikiLeaks' publication of leaked classified American documents, and that the U.S. authorities will seek his extradition. His lawyers have made it clear that until that matter is resolved, with a guarantee from the British government that he would not be

Earlier this month, Ecuador said it had granted the Australian-born hacker citizenship, as the South American country tried to unblock the stalemate that has kept Assange as its houseguest for five-and-a-half years.

Ecuador also asked Britain to grant him diplomatic status. Britain refused, saying "the way to resolve this issue is for Julian Assange to leave the embassy to face justice."

British prosecutors had opposed the removal of the warrant, saying Assange shouldn't be immune from the law simply because he has managed to evade justice for a long time.

Extradition lawyer Rebecca Niblock of Kingsley Napley said before the ruling that Assange's legal argument was a longshot.

"Failing to surrender to bail is like insulting the court's authority" and unlikely to go down well with the court, she said.

2018 The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Read the original:
Julian Assange United Kingdom arrest warrant upheld in ...