Owen Jones on Julian Assange

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • JohnSkelton

    Owen Jones on Julian Assange

    Important (Imv) article by Owen Jones on Julian Assange's extradition to Sweden.

    Although now granted political asylum by Ecuador, Assange is a rape suspect who skipped bail. Yet some of his supporters have ended up making arguments that they would never dream of making about anybody else.

    Powers have always dominated other peoples without their consent, but high levels of secrecy are needed to maintain acquiescence from their own citizens. The leaking of 400,000 documents about the Iraq war in October 2010, for example, exposed widespread torture and the deaths of thousands of civilians.

    That Western governments preferably want WikiLeaks crushed is indisputable. Former US soldier Bradley Manning languished in solitary confinement for 11 months on suspicion of passing classified documents to WikiLeaks, leading to the UN's special rapporteur on torture to accuse the US government of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. A US grand jury is currently examining evidence that might link Assange to Manning, though it is yet to report. Fears that Assange could end up extradited to the US – and what might happen to him there – are not without foundation.

    But that does not mean Assange should be immune from very serious allegations in Sweden. Two women have both accused Assange of rape, and there have been repeated attempts by some of his supporters to discredit them. There have been suggestions that they are part of some kind of CIA honeytrap. The campaigning journalist John Pilger has described them as "concocted charges". But Assange's own lawyer, Ben Emmerson, does not dispute the sincerity of the accusers, arguing in court: "Nothing I say should be taken as denigrating the complainant, the genuineness of their feelings of regret, to trivialise their experience or to challenge whether they felt Assange's conduct was disrespectful, discourteous, disturbing or even pushing at the boundaries of what they felt comfortable with."


  • Pabmusic
    Full Member
    • May 2011
    • 5537

    #2
    What a very good article.

    If we had been told in 2007 that, in five years' time, we would have popular support to prevent the UK extraditing anyone for the alleged rape of two women - and to Sweden (Sweden!?) - we would not have believed it. Of course the UK must not bow to this pressure. I'm afraid, though, that this episode has made it very difficult for a future court to grant bail again in an extradition case.

    Comment

    • amateur51

      #3
      Excellent article I agree.

      The shadow of Roger Casement hangs over this case I'm afraid but the author is right.

      I am still extremely wary of UK's habit of jumping when USA says 'jump'

      Comment

      • JohnSkelton

        #4
        Originally posted by amateur51 View Post
        I am still extremely wary of UK's habit of jumping when USA says 'jump'
        Agreed completely, which makes the hostility of Assange's supporters over this to him being extradited to Sweden so curious. Given that Sweden isn't generally regarded as so prepared to jump to order. It's a great pity, IMV, that an opportunity has been given the interests who oppose WikiLeaks, but that doesn't put Assange above accountability for his actions, or make the spectacle of some on the Left coming over all it was a put up job / she was asking for it edifying .

        Comment

        • Bryn
          Banned
          • Mar 2007
          • 24688

          #5
          "Two women have both accused Assange of rape"

          My understanding is that neither of the women concerned have themselves accused Assange of rape. Indeed, I hear that they have specifically stated that they do not consider the sexual behaviour of which they do accuses him as being rape. To that extent, the charges might well be considered "concocted". That said, what he is accused of by the alleged victims does seem to be behaviour that need to be addressed as assault, at the very least.

          Comment

          • johnb
            Full Member
            • Mar 2007
            • 2903

            #6
            The article might be very good but I am wary of Owen Jones. IMO he is a prominent member of the 'rent-a-gob' crowd. Always an intensely held opinion about everything and always expressed with passionate forcefulness.

            In 20 years time he might be worth reading but, for now, I quickly pass over his column in The Indy.

            Comment

            • jean
              Late member
              • Nov 2010
              • 7100

              #7
              Originally posted by Bryn View Post
              Indeed, I hear that they have specifically stated that they do not consider the sexual behaviour of which they do accuses him as being rape. To that extent, the charges might well be considered "concocted". That said, what he is accused of by the alleged victims does seem to be behaviour that need to be addressed as assault, at the very least.
              So why call the charges concocted?

              Comment

              • jean
                Late member
                • Nov 2010
                • 7100

                #8
                Originally posted by JohnSkelton View Post
                Given that Sweden isn't generally regarded as so prepared to jump to order...
                Pilger thinks it is:

                If the Supreme Court in London rejects Assange's appeal, the one hope is the independence of the Swedish courts. However, as the London Independent has revealed, Sweden and the US have already begun talks on Assange's "temporary surrender" to the US...

                Comment

                • french frank
                  Administrator/Moderator
                  • Feb 2007
                  • 30249

                  #9
                  I know this is very simple-minded in a complicated world, but if Sweden's sole concern is to investigate and if necessary charge Assange for the offences that are alleged to have taken place in Sweden, have they clarified what their position would be if the US demanded extradition?

                  Owen Jones writes 'his supporters have ended up making arguments that they would never dream of making about anybody else', you would be hard put to think of anyone else who might be in a similar situation. Would Jones's argument still apply if the alleged rape offences had also taken place in the US and the US requested his extradition only in respect of those alleged offences?
                  It isn't given us to know those rare moments when people are wide open and the lightest touch can wither or heal. A moment too late and we can never reach them any more in this world.

                  Comment

                  • Bryn
                    Banned
                    • Mar 2007
                    • 24688

                    #10
                    Originally posted by jean View Post
                    So why call the charges concocted?
                    Because the charges (or rather the accusation to be investigated - as I understand it he has not been charged with anything yet) do not appear to reflect the views of his alleged victims regarding the nature of his sexual interaction with them.

                    Comment

                    • Pabmusic
                      Full Member
                      • May 2011
                      • 5537

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Bryn View Post
                      "Two women have both accused Assange of rape"

                      My understanding is that neither of the women concerned have themselves accused Assange of rape. Indeed, I hear that they have specifically stated that they do not consider the sexual behaviour of which they do accuses him as being rape...
                      I know nothing of Swedish criminal law, but I don't think that either of the alleged victims is a lawyer. Whether the behaviour amounts to rape (or anything else) in Swedish law is a matter for Swedish prosecutors and courts. If it was the UK, and the victim said "I was OK with it until I realised he wasn't using a condom like he said he would do", that would be rape. It's R v Williams [1923], a music teacher was properly convicted of rape by deception who had intercourse with a girl after pretending that his acts were a method of training her voice.
                      Last edited by Pabmusic; 17-08-12, 10:17.

                      Comment

                      • jean
                        Late member
                        • Nov 2010
                        • 7100

                        #12
                        They have refused to interview him in the Ecuadorean embassy, which isn't helpful.

                        Comment

                        • aeolium
                          Full Member
                          • Nov 2010
                          • 3992

                          #13
                          I agree with the tenor of the article that Assange should answer any charges of rape/sexual assault in Sweden but I'm not sure about this part of the argument:

                          "As leading QC Francis FitzGibbon has pointed out, under Section 58 of Britain's Extradition Act, Sweden would have to gain the consent of the British Home Secretary first. As signatories of the ECHR, neither country can extradite a suspect to a country where they will face the death penalty or "inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment"."

                          Gaining the consent of the Home Secretary for extradition, as has been shown in other cases, is not exactly a very difficult matter. And if neither country can extradite a suspect to a country where they will face the death penalty or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment how is it that the UK has already extradited (and indeed effected the extraordinary rendition of) a number of people to the USA where that is precisely what they face.

                          The question of why the USA has not applied to the UK for the extradition of Assange is an interesting one. It could be that Sweden already have a prior request which the UK is obliged to honour and the Assange supporters' fear is that, whatever happens to Assange in respect of the charges he may face in Sweden, a request from the USA for extradition may then come. It would be good to have a legal expert comment on this.

                          Comment

                          • Pabmusic
                            Full Member
                            • May 2011
                            • 5537

                            #14
                            Originally posted by french frank View Post
                            I know this is very simple-minded in a complicated world, but if Sweden's sole concern is to investigate and if necessary charge Assange for the offences that are alleged to have taken place in Sweden, have they clarified what their position would be if the US demanded extradition?...
                            And why on earth should they have to?

                            Comment

                            • jean
                              Late member
                              • Nov 2010
                              • 7100

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Bryn View Post
                              Because the charges (or rather the accusation to be investigated - as I understand it he has not been charged with anything yet) do not appear to reflect the views of his alleged victims regarding the nature of his sexual interaction with them.
                              The formulation of the accusations is not so far from what appears to have actually happened as to merit the verb concoct, which means To make up, devise, or plan by concert, or by artificial combination; to put together, make up, or fabricate (a story, project, fraud, etc.).

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X