To the Prosecutor-General of Sweden
Mr Anders Perklev
Dear Prosecutor-General Anders Perklev,
Amidst
these battered times for Sweden’s judicial reputation, few things would
have been more revitalizing than a statement by the Attorney-General,
setting the record straight on the international criticism concerning
the mismanagement of the Julian Assange case.
However,
your comment on the public stance of the Liberal Party's judicial
spokesperson Johan Pehrson MP, gravely risks the prestige of the Swedish
legal system.
You
stated: "It is remarkable that a parliamentarian openly criticises
individual cases like this. It goes against the separation of power
between legislators and the judiciary". 1
There
have been many instances of political interference in this case by the
Swedish government. For instance, the statements by Prime Minister
Fredrik Reinfeldt and the Foreign Minister Carl Bildt. Is it that you
consider that the Montesquieu principle, 2 that you have used as your main argument, contains an exception regarding the governmental interference in an ongoing case?
On
11 February 2011, Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt stated in the DN and
Aftonbladet newspapers, that Julian Assange had been indicted. He then
went on to take a position that was biased in favour of the complainants
in the case. Not only was this political interference in an ongoing
case, but also it was based on untruths; Julian Assange has not been
charged. The statement by the Prime Minister was:
“We
have an independent judiciary which also in this case acted according
to Swedish law. One has even public-indicted Julian Assange on
allegations of rape”. And, “I can only regret that the rights and
position of women weigh so lightly when it comes to this type of
questions compared to other types of theories brought forward.” 3
On
15 August 2012, Göran Haglund, Swedish Minister of Social Affairs, told
the Expressen newspaper: “Assange is a very coward person that does not
dare to confront the charges against him”. And he added, “If he did
the things he is accused of, I think one can call him a lowlife. He
seems to be a miserable wretch." 4
Considering
your comments to Johan Pehrson MP, it is peculiar that the General
Prosecutor Office did not issue a statement defending the “independence
of the judiciary” from executive power? This type of selective behaviour
creates a perception that the Swedish judiciary is not independent.
The
principle of the separation of powers precludes the interference by the
Legislative of the Judiciary, and vice versa. Is it appropriate, as
Sweden's Attorney-General, to publicly criticise Johan Pehrson MP for
exactly the same behaviour that you exhibited? Why would a
representative of the Judiciary try to inhibit an initiative by a member
of the Legislature, which seeks to find a solution to this deadlocked
case, that has become a serious political burden both domestically and
internationally?
It
is known that both the Ecuadorean government and Julian Assange would
welcome the questioning of Julian Assange in London, which is standard
Swedish praxis. Julian Assange has never refused to be questioned.
However, he has stated that he feels there is a risk of being further
extradited to the U.S.
Julian
Assange’s concern is based on the fact that, in circumstances where
someone has been sought for extradition by the U.S. government, and they
were on Swedish soil, Sweden has granted every request.
The
international community is well aware of this deadlock and the role
Sweden is playing in blocking the resolution of the case. Please correct
me if I'm wrong:
A.
The Swedish prosecutor has refused to question Julian Assange in London
and instead, for no apparent reason, requires him to come to Sweden,
where he will be immediately held incommunicado. A state that would
prevent normal contact with his lawyer.
B.
Julian Assange, in an assessment that has been shared by the Ecuadorean
government, has legitimate concerns regarding an onwards extradition
from Sweden to the U.S. You must be aware that, according to well known
Swedish praxis, 5 this step - if it takes the form of an extraordinary rendition - does not need to be cleared by the Judiciary.
C.
This situation could be immediately solved if the Swedish government
extends a guarantee that Julian Assange will not be deported. If this
were to happen, Julian Assange would be willing to be questioned in
Sweden.
D.
However, the government, for no tenable reason, refuses to extend these
guarantees and ultimately these extradition decisions are the privilege
of the government, not the Judiciary.
Against
this backdrop, why would you consider it “strange” that Johan Pehrson
MP, a member of the Justice Committee of the Swedish Parliament, is
trying to find a solution to the current stalemate?
Many
outside Sweden are concerned by the Swedish prosecutor's refusal to
question Julian Assange in London and the government's refusal to issue a
non-deportation guarantees, both of which are delaying the resolution
of this case.
I
believe this is either caused by political factors, or because the
prosecutor does not have a legitimate case against Julian Assange.
Either way, it is your responsibility to end this remarkable situation
as soon as possible.
Yours Sincerely,
Professor Emeritus Marcello Ferrada de Noli
4 February 2014
Published in Professorsblogg.com 4 Feb 2014
___________
References:
1. “Prosecutor slams politician's comments on Assange case”. Swedish Radio, 3 Feb 2014.
2. Montesquieu. De L’Esprit Des Loix. Chatelain, 1749.
3.
“– Det är beklagligt. Vi har ett självständigt rättsväsende som i det
här fallet dessutom agerat på svensk lagstiftning. Man har till allmänt
åtal instämt Julian Assange för anklagelser om våldtäkt, sade Reinfeldt
då till journalister i riksdagen.” “Jag kan bara beklaga att kvinnors
rätt och ställning väger så lätt när det gäller den här typen av frågor
jämfört med andra typer av teorier som förs fram.” In: “Reinfeldt
beklagade negative bild av rättsväsendet”. DN, 11 Feb 2011.
4.
“Assange är en väldigt feg person som inte vågar konfrontera
anklagelserna mot honom.” “– Om han har gjort det han är anklagad för så
tycker jag att man kan kalla honom för ett kräk. Han verkar vara en
ynklig stackare.” In: “Hägglund om asyl för Assange: "Fegis" .
Expressen, 4 Febr 2012.
5. Resolution on Sweden by the UN Committee Against Torture, CAT/C/34/D/233/2003, 24 May 2005.
No comments:
Post a Comment