What is the feminist view of the Julian Assange stand off

So Hague [do you mean Assange?] could be appointed a diplomat after being given citizenship of E. Or a court order saying he can have safe passage could be obtained

I don't think either of those statements is correct. You cannot be appointed a diplomat unless the host country accepts your accreditation, and the UK is not about to do that for Assange. There is a suggestion that Ecuador could appoint him their ambassador to the UN and that would work, but I think even that is doubted. Nor do I think any court in the UK could order him to be given safe passage. The doctrine of comity (I think it's called) means the courts will not interfere in matters to do with relations with another nation state that are a matter for government.

And let's not get our kinds of asylum mixed up. JA is claiming diplomatic asylum, which means seeking asylum from the country he is in by taking refuge in the diplomatic mission of another country. That is entirely different from the 'conventional' asylum case of traveling to another country because you are in danger in your own country or country of domicile. The US has said it doesn't even recognise diplomatic asylum (remember what they did to Noriega in Panama when he was holed up in the residence of the Papal Nuncio, or whatever he was called?)

What's the message in all this relevant to feminism? Rape is nothing, only freedom of speech matters. The rape charges are trivial even if you believe there is a case to answer, the women complainants don't matter, JA is too important to be held to account over this. Shocking.

The women made the complaints. The Swedish police (not government) decided the nature of the charges that fit the descriptions made by the women and presumably taking into account the answers made by Assange in his initial interview.

Remember at this time Assange was still in Sweden and had plans to make a base there - the Swedish police had no reason to treat him differently to any other person in Sweden on business with allegations against them.

Empusa Sun 19-Aug-12 19:18:02

In which case he has even less to fear from going to Sweden. Unless he knows they can prove his guilt that is..

I believe the "fear" is the involvement of the US who are desperate to prosecute him for embarrassing revelations on Wikileaks. The Swedish government (not the women involved) decided to press charges; suggestion is they did so at the behest of the US government.

Personally I'd be shouting "set-up" if it was a different type of charge i.e. tax fraud or some other financial irregularity, I know I shouldn't...

From the figures in Klein's article, it sounds like they're about on a par with us when it comes to reporting and prosecuting. I am surprised, I thought they'd be better.

WTF is all the 'sex by surprise' crap?

"the same Swedish authorities going after Assange do a worse job prosecuting reported rapes than do police and the judiciary in any comparable country."

In which case he has even less to fear from going to Sweden. Unless he knows they can prove his guilt that is..

Sorry meant to include this in last post... not encouraging reading re. Sweden

PlentyOfPubeGardens Sat 18-Aug-12 19:02:44
... oh yes, he's now wanted for questioning in connection with allegations of one rape and three other sexual crimes (wouldn't all three count as sexual assault in UK?) in a country that takes VAW a little bit more seriously than most places. That's what he's frightened of, not extradition to the US.

the same Swedish authorities going after Assange do a worse job prosecuting reported rapes than do police and the judiciary in any comparable country.

And if this is accurate then I don't know what to say...

Censored on a thread about censorship. I think my case is being made for me. Thank you.

Anyway he's doing pretty well.

Ooh I cannot STAND JA and am disgusted that he's not facing the music. If, as he claims, he is innocent, then surely there shouldn't be a problem, eh?

By the way, there is precisely 0% chance that he would face the death penalty in the US. Sweden is bound by Articles 2 (right to life) and 3 (right not to face inhuman or degrading treatment or torture) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The US would have to agree that the death penalty would not be an option before Sweden could send him there. He is just someone who feels he should be above the law.

Isn't the whole Ecuador thing because he met the President once and they got on well?

I am do frustrated by it all. Man up, JA. If you didn't do it, you have nothing to fear. Except perhaps a long stretch in a US prison, which you no doubt foresaw before setting up Wikileaks...

Thanks very much for those posts, Empusa, they have helped me a great deal!

Xenia " We certainly want as feminists the asylum laws respected. Many a woman has sought asylum against sexist regimes."

Which asylum laws are these that you imply are in danger of not being respected? You mentioned them on the In the News thread too.

I recommend everyone read
This wrt why he hasn't been charged, the actual charges, and his extradition fear.

This about the timeline of events.

This about his fears of the death penalty

This about Ecuador and it's stance on freedom of speech

More about extradition

This about the supposed persecution

This reminder that he has jumped bail

Read points 6 and 8.

Xenia, you appear to posting rape myths. If you ever have a moment of conscience about this, you can donate to Rape Crisis here. They'd be very grateful for your donation, being as how you're so wealthy and all.

JA is full of shit isn't he?

I haven't really had my eye on the ball wrt what's going on - I found this BBC timeline useful for catching up. Especially this bit:

18 August 2010
Mr Assange applies for a residence permit to live and work in Sweden. He hopes to create a base for Wikileaks there, because of the country's laws protecting whistle-blowers. (my bold)

He obviously viewed Sweden as a relatively safe bet in terms of his activities with Wikileaks. What has changed? ...

... oh yes, he's now wanted for questioning in connection with allegations of one rape and three other sexual crimes (wouldn't all three count as sexual assault in UK?) in a country that takes VAW a little bit more seriously than most places. That's what he's frightened of, not extradition to the US.

This BBC article is full of it:

At Belmarsh Magistrates' Court in London, Mr Assange's lawyers accused the prosecutor in Sweden attempting to extradite Mr Assange of having a "biased view" against men.

His lawyers argued that The offences Mr Assange faces - unlawful coercion and sexual molestation - are not criminal acts under British law;

Oh look - women being unhinged again ...

Retired Swedish appeal court judge Brita Sundberg-Weitman, who was called as a witness, attacked Mr Assange's treatment by the authorities.

Talking about the prosecutor Marianne Ny, she said: "She seems to take it for granted that everybody under prosecution is guilty. I think she is so preoccupied with the situation of battered women and raped women that she has lost balance."

... and a nice nasty bit of victim blaming:

A second witness, Goran Rudling, told the court one of the alleged victims had deleted comments and Tweets that suggested she was still friendly with Mr Assange after the alleged assault.

Sorry, this is probably all old news to you lot isn't it? I haven't really kept up

Ennis, I see what you mean, and I can't think of a more coherent way to state my concerns. I am certainly aware of the "we believe you" and support it wholeheartedly. The current misogyny in the world worries me but I suppose progress isn't linear, either.

monsterchild, he can not be charged first because he has not yet been questioned by swedish police

not saying whether case is right or wrong but can not be charged in Sweden without questioning it is possible that he could be extradited questioned then released but he refuses to attend questioning, Sweden have followed international extradiction procedures.

To claim asylum with ecaudor for freedom of sppeech seems rather ironic to say the least

Cross post with SGM, so that makes more sense.

Monsterchild, there is more detail about the Swedish legal system on the In the News thread.

You might want to check the end of your post against the We Believe You page.

In the UK one can't be 'charged' without the opportunity of questioning. Arrest, caution, question and charge.