Panel decision on Assange 'indirectly, but still legally, binding,' UN says

[webfact]

Panel decision on Assange 'indirectly, but still legally, binding,' UN says



"The decision is indirectly, but still legally, binding."

GENEVA: -- A United Nations panel has decided Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is being ‘arbitrarily detained,’ a Swedish foreign ministry spokesperson has confirmed.

The UN’s findings will be published on Friday, February 5 and could be used to apply pressure on Sweden, which is calling for Assange to be extradited. In a video on Twitter, the agency gave ‘clarifications’ on whether or not the panel’s decision is carries legal weight.

Christophe Peschoux of UN Human Rights said “The decision is indirectly, but still legally, binding.”

Where is Assange and why?

Assange claimed asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London three-and-a half years ago to escape extradition to Sweden over accusations of sexual assault dating back to 2010.

Charges of sexual molestation and unlawful coercion were dropped in August, 2015, however the more serious accusation of rape still stands.

Assange has always denied all allegations against him.

UN decision ‘interpreted Swedish law’

Speaking ahead of the official release of the panel’s verdict, Assange’s lawyer, Per Samuelson said the decision would not be “formally binding” and Sweden would be “free to neglect it and go against it.” However, he warned this could be impossible to do as the panel “interpreted Swedish law” in coming to its conclusion.

Extradition

In a tweet the day before the UN decision, Assange said he would “accept arrest by British police on Friday if UN rules against me.”

Britain, meanwhile, maintains the 44-year-old Australian national will be arrested if he leaves the embassy while a European Arrest Warrant is in place.


-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-02-05

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.

[does]

How right your are. For those unfamiliar with the case, just do a search for the "lady" who is prosecuting this case. She is a feminist fundamentalist.

[Geoffggi]

I have been following this from the start and cannot understand why, if there are no under the table agreements between the UK & America that the UK cannot agree to guarantee that Julian Assange must not be transferred to America but only to answer questions on this other charge or why officials cannot question him in the UK.

Obviously there are agreements between the two countries which is expected; however, why has Australia not put up any suggestions to help one of it's own citizens

[Andaman Al]

I must be feeling jaded today. Can anybody explain to me, what does : “The decision is indirectly, but still legally, binding.” mean?

[Krataiboy]

The shameful treatment of this man is an indictment of Western societies which seem increasingly to be abandoning the principles of free speech and individual liberty our forebears gave their lives in two world wars to uphold.

Why can't the Swedes, if they truly believe Assange is guilty of sexual assault, send detectives to investigate him at the Ecuadorian embassy? They know that once he steps outside, he will pounced upon and end up being thrown to the wolves in the US whose appalling breaches of human rights he courageously exposed.

One can only assume that this is what they and the British government, which is cynically aiding abetting the hounding of this whistle blower, really want. We need to stop shooting messengers like Assange, Manning and Snowden and pay more attention to the messages.

Edited February 5, 2016 by Krataiboy

[retarius]

This guy is a persecuted hero in the mould of Ed Snowden. But the UK authorities will not let him leave without being arrested and extradited as their masters in the US will not allow it. The British judiciary is still relatively independent so he may get lucky in the extradition proceedings, but I doubt it. US vengeance wins out most of the time.

[Baerboxer]

How right your are. For those unfamiliar with the case, just do a search for the "lady" who is prosecuting this case. She is a feminist fundamentalist.

Read up on the charges to. Looks like a bit of witness coercion and circumstantial clap trap pushed forward by a carefully chosen zealot after the original prosecutor didn't sit it the way certain people wanted.

GBP 12m of British Tax payers money up the swanny, because Cameron and his clowns, just like Sweden, want to pander to the US.

Heaven forbid, someone who wants to tell the public the truth.

[johna]

John Pilger writing a very concise description of Assange's persecution by the British, and Swedish governments.

The siege of Knightsbridge is both an emblem of gross injustice and a gruelling farce. For three years, a police cordon around the Ecuadorean embassy in London has served no purpose other than to flaunt the power of the state.

http://johnpilger.com/articles/assange-the-untold-story-of-an-epic-struggle-for-justice

[Chicog]

How can he be called "detained" when there is absolutely nothing stopping him walking out of a place into which he walked voluntarily anyway?

What a waste of money.

He'll just stay there until the statute of limitations runs out and think he's home and dry, and then they'll nab him anyway.

[Srikcir]

The UN panel decision is precedential.

The Ecuadorian embassy needs to eject Assange from the embassy confines so that he may start his day of freedom immediately.

Maybe take a walk in Knightsbridge.

[Redline]

Come on, the world is not just. The UK, the US and Sweden will make sure he pays for what he did~right or wrong. I'm he probably guessed what would happen. He didn't change much. He just caused some squabbles. Most counties know all countries spy!

[Mr Money Bags]

I've said it before and I shall say it again: If it was your mother, sister, or daughter leveling accusations of rape, I don't believe any one of you would be advocating this person avoiding trial.

I am very sure ALL of you have more honour than that......

You're Welcome!!!

[Ulysses G.]

He'll just stay there until the statute of limitations runs out and think he's home and dry, and then they'll nab him anyway.

A statute of limitations only applies to suspects who have not been charged. He can hide forever and still be liable for arrest.

Edited February 6, 2016 by Ulysses G.

[impulse]

I've said it before and I shall say it again: If it was your mother, sister, or daughter leveling accusations of rape, I don't believe any one of you would be advocating this person avoiding trial.

I am very sure ALL of you have more honour than that......

You're Welcome!!!

You probably need to read up on the nature of the rape charges before going off on anyone supporting the guy.

And you may want to consider the probability that those charges only serve as an excuse to get him into custody so he can be extradited to the US where he'll disappear into a black hole to serve as a warning to anyone else that wants to expose the misdeeds of governments around the world.

Edited February 6, 2016 by impulse

[Mr Money Bags]

I've said it before and I shall say it again: If it was your mother, sister, or daughter leveling accusations of rape, I don't believe any one of you would be advocating this person avoiding trial.

I am very sure ALL of you have more honour than that......

You're Welcome!!!

You probably need to read up on the nature of the rape charges before going off on anyone supporting the guy.

And you may want to consider the probability that those charges only serve as an excuse to get him into custody so he can be extradited to the US where he'll disappear into a black hole to serve as a warning to anyone else that wants to expose the misdeeds of governments around the world.

Thankfully, you are entitled to your opinion.

I did not "go off" on anyone. I merely pointed out an apparent discrepancy in thinking

Thank you for your highly valued input......

You're Welcome!!

[neverdie]

How right your are. For those unfamiliar with the case, just do a search for the "lady" who is prosecuting this case. She is a feminist fundamentalist.

A case by design. He's Been lined up for a fall, should't come as any surprise really.

It's about time Australia stops living in the anal passage of some of these large western nation, mans up and stands up for one of their citizens that's not a lowlife welfare blushing drug runner.

This is a Political issue, the only person being raped is Julian.

Edited February 6, 2016 by neverdie

[Publicus]

Assange has been in Vladimir Putin's back pocket for years. Putin years ago gave Assange his own television program in Russia and Assange led Edward Snowden to Moscow via Hong Kong.

Assange is screwed no matter what and there's nothing Vlad the Putin has been able to do about it. All of which makes Snowden nervous.

[vaultdweller0013]

I must be feeling jaded today. Can anybody explain to me, what does : The decision is indirectly, but still legally, binding. mean?

Basically, it is not binding.

However, they claim it was based on Swedish Law, so theoretically the courts in Sweden *should* come to the same conclusion. Unless, quite possibly, they have a different opinion on Swedish law.

It would be similiar to a US Circuit court ruling. Such a ruling is binding only in the circuit it is issued in. However, it can be very, very compelling to cite in a different circuit.

[Langsuan Man]

I must be feeling jaded today. Can anybody explain to me, what does : “The decision is indirectly, but still legally, binding.” mean?

It means nothing, the UN has no police force, courts, or prisons, so it is just a bunch of windbags talking like they are important

Where was the UN during the genocide during the Balkan wars? Where was the UN during the reign of terror in Cambodia? Where was the UN during the genocide in Rwanda?

Safe in their compounds trying to look important but when the sh...hits the fan they are no where to be seen issuing press releases explaining why they are impotent

[Thongkorn]

The question i would like to ask , "Will he pay the bill of millions of Pounds for the Police who waited for him for the last few years, OR the British tax payer. He walked in He can walk out, after that pot luck.

[tumama]

It is legally binding due to the treaties we have signed. U.N can't force U.K and Sweden to comply with it though.

Totally unprecedented that two democratic countries are planning to disregard a U.N ruling. It's something you would expect from a dictatorship such as North Korea.

[tumama]

The question i would like to ask , "Will he pay the bill of millions of Pounds for the Police who waited for him for the last few years, OR the British tax payer. He walked in He can walk out, after that pot luck.

He is the victim and he should be compensated. He is now, by international law, an innocent man who should be allowed to travel anywhere he wants.

[Publicus]

The UN advisory is obtuse at best and based on how Swedish law only can be interpreted while the body that issued the waffle was unable to make a clear and declaratory statement based in any kind of international law. Conversely, Sweden's direct statements of its sovereign law and what its law says and means is the only definitive interpretation.

Assange is being investigated by the US Government in respect of state secrets and he is being investigated by authorities in Sweden for possible criminal violations.

The two are each legitimate governments seeking to sit face to face with Assange to pose questions in respect of duly enacted laws which the governments are responsible to enforce. This is in direct contrast to the people who politicise the legitimate interests of the US, UK, Sweden, Australia and anyone who shares their issues and concerns.

Assange is of his own choice and decision actively evading and avoiding being questioned by either government in respect of their laws.

There is nothing illegal about the government of the USA or that of Sweden in pursuing the laws of each. The USA especially and in particular has a serious case of state secrets and national security to pursue in respect of Assange.

People in either country or any country get detained and questioned all the time. In other instances citizens sometimes present themselves voluntarily or under their own steam.

Assange has the equal opportunity to present himself to authorities rather than to hibernate in the diplomatic office of another government in yet another country. One could ask whether Assange is a man or a mouse but no answer would extract him from his selfmade trap.

[Publicus]

 

It is legally binding due to the treaties we have signed. U.N can't force U.K and Sweden to comply with it though.

Totally unprecedented that two democratic countries are planning to disregard a U.N ruling. It's something you would expect from a dictatorship such as North Korea.

North Korea?!?

Impossible to take the statement seriously. Especially given Assange, Putin, Wikileaks.

Vlad the Putin gave Assange his own television talk show only several years ago.

Julian Assange Live, brought to you by the Kremlin

"It was all a bit rich: Assange, self-described defender of the free flow of information, working in the service of the Kremlin, which has been notorious in its suppression of the media and demonstrations for greater freedom of expression."


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/arts/television/julian-assange-live-brought-to-you-by-the-kremlin/article4100800/

[kimamey]

How right your are. For those unfamiliar with the case, just do a search for the "lady" who is prosecuting this case. She is a feminist fundamentalist.

Read up on the charges to. Looks like a bit of witness coercion and circumstantial clap trap pushed forward by a carefully chosen zealot after the original prosecutor didn't sit it the way certain people wanted.

GBP 12m of British Tax payers money up the swanny, because Cameron and his clowns, just like Sweden, want to pander to the US.

Heaven forbid, someone who wants to tell the public the truth.

So why didn't the US ask for his extradition then we could have pandered to them directly and sent him over?

[kimamey]

The question i would like to ask , "Will he pay the bill of millions of Pounds for the Police who waited for him for the last few years, OR the British tax payer. He walked in He can walk out, after that pot luck.

He is the victim and he should be compensated. He is now, by international law, an innocent man who should be allowed to travel anywhere he wants.

Where did it say he was innocent of rape?