Swedish prosecutor questions Julian Assange at Ecuador's London embassy

Julian Assange faced questioning by Ecuadorean and Swedish prosecutors regarding a sexual assault allegedly committed by the WikiLeaks founder six years ago.

Matt Dunham/AP
Julian Assange's cat, dressed with a collar and tie, looks out from a window of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, Monday, the same day that Swedish Prosecutor Ingrid Isgren arrived at the embassy to interview the Wikileaks founder about allegations concerning possible sexual misconduct committed in Sweden six years ago.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was questioned at Ecuador’s London embassy for four hours Monday. The interview was conducted by an Ecuadorian prosecutor posing questions on behalf of Swedish chief prosecutor Ingrid Isgren, who was also present, accompanied by a Swedish police investigator.

Mr. Assange has been holed up in the embassy for four years, seeking to avoid extradition to Sweden under an arrest warrant issued in November 2010. He has said that he fears being extradited to the United States, if he is arrested, on charges of espionage, though no such charges are known to have been made.

The questioning that began Monday is the culmination of lengthy negotiations over the details of any such interview, and it relates to an accusation that Assange committed rape in Sweden in 2010.

The Australian national first rose to prominence in the same year as the alleged rape, when his organization began releasing hundreds of thousands of classified US diplomatic and military documents.

“As a result of six years of delays and over four and a half years of illegal and arbitrary detention, Mr Assange is today faced with [a] Hobson's choice,” Melinda Taylor, a member of Assange’s legal team, told Reuters. “[E]ither he gives a statement in which his health, memory and psychological state are severely impeded, or, he is denied once more, an opportunity to be heard.”

A United Nations panel determined in February that the treatment of Assange amounted to “arbitrary detention,” saying it should be brought to an end and the Australian granted compensation. But a Swedish appeals court ruled in September that the case must proceed, following a request from Assange to have the arrest warrant overturned, basing its decision on what it deemed to be a question of strong public interest.

Some of Assange’s supporters believe a moment of change could nevertheless have arrived, with Donald Trump’s election to the White House.

The president-elect said during his campaign, “I love WikiLeaks,” reveling in the organization’s release of Hillary Clinton’s hacked emails. Assange’s US attorney, Barry Pollack, told The Guardian that President-elect Trump could preemptively pardon Assange, once he reaches the White House, if he so chose.

Yet such a move would undoubtedly stoke fury among critics of WikiLeaks who fume at what they see as the partisan nature of the organization’s activities, releasing only documents damaging to the Democratic nominee.

In the meantime, journalists and Assange supporters have been gathering outside Ecuador's London embassy, where the questioning could last several days. No glimpse of the man himself was to be had, but a cat thought to belong to Assange, one that has its own Twitter account, settled down at the window to watch proceedings outside, dressed in a collar and tie.

This report contains material from the Associated Press and Reuters.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Swedish prosecutor questions Julian Assange at Ecuador's London embassy
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today