Thread by @AdamWagner1

Swedish prosecution decision on whether to resume Julian Assange prosecution is live now here (also being translated into English) svt.se/nyheter/inrike…

Swedish prosecutor begins by summarising the previous facts of the case. Reminds us that Assange fought the European Arrest Warrant requested by Sweden up to Supreme Court and the outcome was that he would be extradited /2

Not clear why the English translator just changed!

Says that once Assange entered the Ecuadorian Embassy the extradition order became impossible to enforce. An agreement was reached so that Assange could be interviewed 14-15 Sep 2016 /3

19 May 2017 the prosecution was discontinued as his extradition to Sweden wouldn't be foreseeable in the foreseeable future. No further steps in the investigation possible as he needed to attend court in Sweden in person. 17 Aug 2020 the offence will become statute board /4

"New circumstances have brought about a need to revise our previous position" - sounds like they will renew the prosecution against Assange /5

Here it is - due to Assange leaving the embassy and being re-detained in the UK the Swedish prosecutors have requested to reopen the preliminary rape investigation against Assange /6

US wants to extradite Assange, formal extradition request due by 14 June 2019.

"I have taken the decision to reopen the preliminary investigation" against Assange for rape /7

Reasons for decision:
- The decision to discontinue wasn't motivated by difficulties relating to evidence but entirely motivated by circumstances at the time which prohibited the furtherance of the investigation.

Important - was because he was in the embassy /8

- "There is still probable cause to suspect that Mr Assange committed rape or a lesser offence"
- As Mr Assange is current incarcerated in the UK the circumstances now allow for an extradition under a European Arrest Warrant
- This was not the case earlier this year /9

- New law allows Swedish prosecutors to conduct interviews with Mr Assange by video link in the UK, but this requires his consent
- "I find that the conditions in which it will be possible to continue and conclude the preliminary investigation are at hand" /10

Next steps:
- The Swedish prosecutors will now go through the motions to appoint a public counsel for the complainant
- Important: prosecutor will apply for a new European Arrest Warrant
/11

- Prosecutor intends to further investigation as much as possible whilst Assange is in prison in the UK serving a sentence of just under a year (of which he will serve half) for skipping bail
- Makes clear that this is an *investigation* and not yet an indictment (charge) /12

Another important point: Swedish prosecutor makes clear that the matter of which extradition request takes precedence between Swedish and US will be a matter for the UK authorities - correct /13

And also makes clear (to head off potential arguments about Swedish authorities being a soft touch for a US extradition request) that any request from the US to Sweden (if Assange is sent there) will require consent of both Swedish *and* UK authorities to action /14

Here is a useful briefing document on the legal basis of the the US extradition request (which has been made) and the Swedish extradition request (which it sounds like will be made shortly) commonslibrary.parliament.uk/world-affairs/…

If there are two competing requests for extradition, what happens?

Here is the important thing now: section 179 of the Extradition Act 2003 allows the Secretary of State to prioritise one extradition request over another. /16

legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/41/…

The Secretary of State (Sajid Javid - the Home Secretary) *must* take into account four factors when considering which request to prioritise, assuming both are valid in the first place.

(a) Relative seriousness: rape is v serious as is hacking into secure state computers /17

(b) Place offences allegedly committed (Sweden and... where was Assange when he is alleged to have assisted Manning?)
(c) Date warrant issued - US one came before but important additional factor that first Swedish request came years ago but was frustrated by Assange's actions /18

(d) Whether he is accused or has fled conviction. In both cases he is accused, though in the US case (unlike Sweden, so far) he is *charged*. That may have weight /19

Interesting and potentially important that the Home Office's public statement says that those are only four factors and others may be taken into account too.

Legally that is probably correct as s.179 says "in particular" not "only these factors" /20

Forgot to tweet the link for [20] above homeofficemedia.blog.gov.uk/2019/04/11/ext… /21