Supreme Court rules on Assange extradition appeal

The Supreme Court has given its ruling in the case of Julian Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority.

Mr Assange is the subject of a request for extradition by the Swedish Prosecuting Authority for the purposes of an investigation into alleged offences of sexual molestation and rape. A European Arrest Warrant (EAW) had been issued by a prosecutor in Sweden in December 2010.

Mr Assange challenged the validity of the EAW on the ground (amongst others) that it had been issued by a public prosecutor who was not a ‘judicial authority’ as required by the Framework Decision and the Extradition Act 2003.

His challenge failed before the Senior District Judge at the extradition hearing and on appeal before the Divisional Court. The Supreme Court granted permission to bring an appeal on this ground as the issue was one of general public importance.

The Supreme Court by a majority of five to two has dismissed the appeal and held that an EAW 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 2003 Act.

Subsequent to the ruling Ms Rose (counsel for Mr Assange) has indicated that she may make an application to re-open the Court's decision. Ms Rose suggested that the majority of the Court appear to have based their decision on the interpretation of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, on which no argument was heard.

The Supreme Court has granted Ms Rose fourteen days to make such an application. If she decides to do so, the Justices will then decide whether to re-open the appeal and accept further submissions (either verbally through a further hearing, or on paper) on the matter.