Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority

Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority were the set of legal proceedings in the United Kingdom concerning the requested extradition of Julian Assange to Sweden for a "preliminary investigation" into accusations of sexual offences allegedly made in August 2010. Assange left Sweden in September 2010 and was arrested in his absence the same day. He was suspected of rape of a lesser degree, unlawful coercion and multiple cases of sexual molestation. In June 2012, Assange breached bail and sought refuge at Ecuador's Embassy in London and was granted asylum.

Assange
v
The Swedish Prosecution Authority
CourtSupreme Court of the United Kingdom
Argued1–2 February 2012
Decided30 May 2012
Neutral citation[2012] UKSC 22
Case history
Prior history[2011] EWHC 2849 (Admin), [2011] EWCA Civ 2849
Holding
A European Arrest Warrant issued by a public prosecutor is a valid Part 1 warrant issued by a judicial authority within the meaning of section 2(2) and 66 of the Extradition Act 2003.
Case opinions
MajorityLord Phillips, joined by Lord Brown, Lord Dyson, Lord Kerr and Lord Walker
DissentLady Hale, Lord Mance
Area of law
Extradition (European Arrest Warrant)

On 12 August 2015, Swedish prosecutors announced that the statute of limitations had expired for three of the allegations against Assange while he was in the Ecuadorian embassy. The investigation into the rape allegation was also dropped by Swedish authorities on 19 May 2017 because of Assange's asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy. Assange said in these proceedings that he feared he would ultimately be extradited to the United States if he were sent to Sweden.

In May 2019, the Swedish Prosecution Authority reopened the investigation against Assange. The prosecutors expressed the intent to extradite Assange from the United Kingdom after he served his 50-week prison sentence for skipping bail. In June 2019, the Uppsala District Court denied a request to detain Assange, thereby preventing his extradition to Sweden.

As of 19 November 2019 the prosecution dropped the case because "the evidence has weakened considerably due to the long period of time that has elapsed" although they were confident in the complainant.

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.