Julian Assange to appear in court after Javid signs US extradition request

The home secretary, Sajid Javid, has revealed he has signed a request for Julian Assange to be extradited to the US where he faces charges of computer hacking.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Thursday, Javid said: “He’s rightly behind bars. There’s an extradition request from the US that is before the courts tomorrow but yesterday I signed the extradition order and certified it and that will be going in front of the courts tomorrow.”

Beijing backs Hong Kong over amendments to extradition laws

Beijing has backed Hong Kong’s government over its controversial plan to allow extraditions to the Chinese mainland, saying it opposes “any outside interference” in the semi-autonomous territory.

Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Monday that Beijing would “continue to firmly support” Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam, who earlier vowed to push ahead with the new laws despite massive protests against them.

Obama Administration Urges Hong Kong To Act Soon On Edward Snowden Extradition

WASHINGTON, June 22 (Reuters) - The United States said on Saturday it wants Hong Kong to extradite Edward Snowden and urged it to act quickly, paving the way for what could be a lengthy legal battle to prosecute the former National Security Agency contractor on espionage charges.

Taking Liberties: Revelations in Hassan Diab case highlight major faultlines in extradition process

The multi-year extradition saga of Ottawa university professor Hassan Diab -- sought by the French for his alleged role in a 1980 Paris bombing that claimed four lives -- has taken yet another bizarre turn with the news that Diab has not even been formally charged. He is merely sought for questioning, with no guarantee that a trial would ensue.

Despite this astounding discovery -- no doubt discomfiting to the Ontario judge who presided over Diab's two-year extradition hearing -- Justice Minister Rob Nicholson has signed a surrender order committing Diab to years of French detention without charge while the 32-year investigation into the crime continues.

It's a decision that Diab's lawyer, Don Bayne, says is unprecedented in Canadian history. But then again, nothing about the Diab case passes the judicial smell test. It would be an understatement at best to declare that Diab, who adamantly denies any involvement and condemns violence and anti-Semitism, is a victim of mistaken identity. Indeed, Diab's finger and palm prints, handwriting, and physical description do not match those of the suspect, yet the case has ground on largely due to an arcane process that sacrifices the Charter rights of an individual to the politics of foreign relations.

Ottawa hits ‘dangerous new low’ with professor’s extradition, supporters say

Supporters of an Ottawa professor who was ordered extradited earlier this month say Canadian justice reached a “dangerous new low” by surrendering Hassan Diab to France not for a trial but to be questioned.

Mr. Diab, a 58-year-old Lebanese-Canadian, is accused of being a terrorist who bombed a Paris synagogue in 1980, killing four people. Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announced the extradition order last week after a judicial ruling paved the way for him to make the decision 10 months before.

Lawyer Donald Bayne said Mr. Diab has not yet been charged and it has recently been revealed that he’s being sent to France for questioning, not a trial.

“We simply cannot be sending Canadians abroad, around the world, so that foreign regimes can investigate them,” Mr. Bayne said Friday at a news conference held by Mr. Diab’s supporters. “They either have a case against them or they don’t.”

French Department of Justice spokesman Olivie Pedro Jose declined to disclose any information about the case, including the status of the charges. However, Agence France-Presse reported French officials confirmed charges are yet to be laid.

Lai Changxing, Chinese Refugee, Released Pending Deportation

THE CANADIAN PRESS -- VANCOUVER - One of China's most wanted fugitives has been ordered released again from the revolving door of custody in what's believed to be Canada's longest refugee battle.

Lai Changxing has spent 12 years fighting his return to China, and he faces expulsion again next week after Canada's Federal Court reviews his latest deportation order.

He was arrested last week in preparation for deportation after a second federal government report concluded Lai wasn't in danger if he was returned to face justice in China.

The federal court granted a temporary stay against the order Monday and will listen to full arguments July 21 on whether Lai could be tortured or killed if he's returned.

Chinese authorities allege Lai orchestrated a vast smuggling ring that cheated the government out of billions of dollars in duties on imported goods and bribed officials to look the other way.

Lawyers for the Canada Border Services Agency asked that Lai be held in custody until the hearing, but an Immigration and Refugee Board adjudicator ordered Lai released Tuesday.

Leeann King concluded Lai is not a flight risk, but did require him to report in once a week, instead of once a month. She did, however, remove one previous condition of his release that he not associate with known members of the criminal gang the Big Circle Boys.

An agency lawyer argued the Lai breached the previous conditions by having contact with gang members, but King reasoned that if border agency officers wouldn't tell him who they believed were gang members, how was he supposed to know.

"They are unreasonable conditions and impossible for Mr. Lai to comply with," she said in her ruling.

King noted that when Lai received his first pre-removal assessment in May 2006 he knew for a few days before he was contacted by border agency officials.

"Mr. Lai didn't flee, didn't attempt to evade CBSA officers and didn't beach his terms."

A second pre-removal assessment took almost five years to complete and Lai's lawyer, Darryl Larson, said it appeared as if the 100-page report was written to make sure Lai was removed from Canada.

He said his client doesn't think he'll get the death sentence, because that would be a public process.

"What he thinks will happen is that he'll be back in the system and all of the sudden he'll have heart attack or there will be some kind of fatal illness or something that he suffers that basically takes him out of the picture," Larson said outside the hearing room.

Larson said Lai can only continue with his legal fight, hoping eventually something breaks through in his favour.

"If it comes down to that, the man is prepared to go back."

Larson said if Lai's case isn't the longest process in Canadian history, it is certainly close.

Lai, who was listening to the decision over the telephone from jail, let out an audible sigh when he heard the decision.
Chinese authorities accuse Lai of masterminding a network that smuggled as much as $10 billion of goods with the protection of corrupt government officials who he plied with cash, prostitutes and booze.

Full Article
Source: Huffington 

The Trials of Julian Assange: A View From Sweden

On July 12 Julian Assange’s new legal team is scheduled to appeal before a London court his extradition to Sweden, where he faces questioning in a sexual assault case brought by two Swedish women. Solicitor Gareth Peirce and barrister Ben Emmerson are respected human rights attorneys replacing a previous team described by Guardian investigations executive editor David Leigh as “high-priced Fleet Street lawyers.”

If Assange loses his July appeal, he can continue protesting his extradition to Sweden, ordered by a London court last February, by appealing to the United Kingdom’s supreme court and the European Court of Human Rights.

Assange’s previous legal team had argued that London is a better sanctuary than Sweden, where he worries he will be extradited to the United States on WikiLeaks conspiracy charges now being explored by a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia. In their legal submissions, Assange’s first set of attorneys argued that if Sweden ever extradited him to the United States, he could be detained at Guantánamo.

Referring to articles by this writer in The Nation, Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! asked Assange in a public forum in England on July 2 whether his legal strategy was changing with the appointment of Gareth Peirce. “Possibly,” he replied, but he denied any suggestion that his legal team had questioned the integrity of the two Swedish women charging him with sexual assault. “We have to be considerate,” he said, while continuing to question the Swedish system, including the fact that so far he has not been charged with a crime there. He renewed his criticism of the federal grand jury in Virginia, calling it a “star chamber” and a “political witch hunt.”

Peirce, an extradition expert, may be ultimately preparing for a US extradition demand, whether from London or Stockholm. In a lengthy 2010 London Review of Books essay, she argued that America’s legal approach regarding extradition procedure is contrary to European norms and in violation of the Convention on Torture: “practice after practice is accepted as standard in America which, in Europe, could risk the prohibition of a trial, or subsequently cause its nullification, or bring an end to the conditions of imprisonment it stipulated.”

If American authorities eventually indict Assange and demand his extradition, the proceedings could raise a firestorm of protest. But any extradition from Sweden would have to be approved by both Stockholm and London—under extradition law, an individual may not be extradited on one charge from nation A to nation B, and then extradited to nation C on a different charge. The prosecutors will be faced with strong opposition from the United States, the United Kingdom and Sweden.

Why did Assange’s first set of lawyers argue that he’s safer from US extradition in Britain, the closest US ally in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and the secret “war on terror”? They never explained. “It’s much easier for him to be snatched from here,” says Leigh from London. “The extradition treaty with the UK is controversial because it makes it easier.” There is more mass media in London and a more vibrant antiwar movement, but little to suggest that the British system is a model of human rights protection compared with Sweden. Even so, “the worry was that Sweden would be more under the thumb of the US than England, and appeals could take up years before an extradition to the US,” said to an American lawyer close to the Assange defense. “The theory always was that it was harder to get him out of the UK than out of Sweden.”

Full Article
Source: The Nation