HIGH COURT(S)RULING (S)
Source: UK Supreme Court
- Barbara Gunnell, The Unintended Consequences of the Assange Hearing’, ABC The Drum, 7 February 2012
- Timely interview with Geoffrey Robertson QC in Daily Beast, 31 january 2012.
- Esther Addley in the Guardian Julian Assange’s extradition battle enters final round, 30 January 2012 (note: Julian Knowles, Q.C. who is interviewed in this article shares his physical office space with Claire Montgomery, the lawyer for the Swedish prosecution).
Submission to the UK Supreme Court for the Appellant Julian Assange
Sweden does not follow the so called "investigating judge model", and Swedish public prosecutors have very strong powers compared with the situation existing in other Member States: They may decide on any kind of measures during investigations, including coercive measures... e.g. phone surveillance, or detention. (European Commission Evaluation Report on Sweden, Doc 99227/2/08 REV 2. October 2008, para 2.1., cited in the submission by the Appellant to the Supreme Court, paragraph 24)
Supreme Court has found against Assange 5-2. The court has allowed a window to reopen the case based on a fair trial objection by Rose QC. Read the summary of the Judgment and more.
We will warmly welcome Secretary Clinton to Stockholm next Sunday. First bilateral visit to Sweden by a US SecState for a very long time.
Appeal hearing: 12 and 13 July 2011
Summary of the hearing
Skeleton Argument for the appellant Julian Assange
Skeleton Reply by the respondent - Claire Montgomery QC for the prosecutor
Summary of the legal argument by the Appellant
Twitter.com: @ silvia_stagg and SilviaStagg2
Mashable.com: @ silviastagg