While hearing the case of Ecuador v. UK, on the matter of Julian Assange’s extradition to Sweden for sex crimes, justices on the ICJ have been reviewing the definition of a “serious” crime. At stake is whether or not the case against Assange in Sweden, which is requesting his presence for a “preliminary investigation,” constitutes a concern that his alleged sex crime is a “serious” crime.
If so, he could be denied his claim of political asylum in the London embassy of Ecuador, and be forcibly extradited to Sweden. If not, the man who heads WikiLeaks, which repeatedly releases stolen US secrets, would get off scot free.
Assange claims that if he is sent to Sweden, he might be extradited to America to face charges that would amount to “political persecution”, perhaps even the death penalty for his espionage. Sweden has maintained that their treaty obligation to America will not let them send a man to his death, so Assange’s fears are unjustified.
All red-blooded Americans would agree that any sex crime constitutes a “serious” crime, but many foreign justices sitting in the ICJ disagree. The opinion of the court has yet to be released, but Fox News hopes that common sense prevails, and the criminal Assange is held to account. Even if it is just in Sweden.