Rixstep
	`About \| ACP \| Buy \| Industry Watch \| Learning Curve \| News \| Products \| Search \| Substack`

Home » Industry Watch

On Swedish Soil: Julian Assange, Carl Bildt & Mutual Legal Assistance

Searching for the real motives for the otherwise inexplicable and indefensible.

Get It

Try It

STOCKHOLM/KNIGHTSBRIDGE (Rixstep) — The deadlock in Knightsbridge continues. And yet, after all this time, and despite all the questions from the British courts and from concerned citizens, Marianne Ny will still not explain why it's so important Julian Assange be in Sweden for the continuation of that preliminary investigation of a broken condom lacking genomic DNA.

Marianne Ny told TIME in December 2010 that using the Mutual Legal Assistance provided by the European Union was against British law. She also said it was against Swedish law. The websites in Sweden reporting on this interview were later 'scrubbed' as her statement was a prevarication.

Minister for foreign affairs Carl Bildt (who more and more seems to be running this show domestically) spoke impromptu with Jennifer Robinson at the big political 'do' in Almedalen last summer and told her point blank that using MLA was 'unconstitutional'.

Then Fredrik Berg of Bildt's ministry spoke with daily SvD and claimed the same thing, this as a response to yet another enquiry from the Ecuadoreans who were trying to get to the bottom of the matter. (Their enquiry was summarily ignored by the Swedes, something that caused consternation in the international media.)

Then Ivan Johnson (@figaropravda) contacted Berg, demanding to know what part of Swedish law covered the matter, only for Berg to almost immediately reply and claim the whole thing was a misunderstanding, which in turn resulted in SvD retracting their story along with a clarification that they'd been misled by Berg.

Then one of the foreign ministry's Twitter feeds told the curious to basically 'bugger off' now and stop asking so many questions, and Marianne Ny's press secretary told the international media she had no clue herself why MLA wasn't used.

Then, just the other day, Bildt's staff at the ministry exploded again, calling the Yoko Ono Lennon award bestowed on Assange 'a remarkable decision'.

Clearly something is not right there.

Bildt's Background

Carl Bildt - he of the 'wheels up' tweets - has insisted all along that he's never talked about Assange with his friends in Washington and Langley, something most people find a bit hard to believe.

It's no secret that Bildt is on very good terms with both Washington and the CIA. He's never tried to hide it. He was invited to the headquarters of the Strategic Air Command even before he entered politics. He took a copy of the Palme report on the submarine incident directly to the CIA once it was ready (and no one stopped him). His political party's been cultivated by the US Republican Party of the US since the early 1980s and the current prime minister Fredrik Reinfeldt has been coached by them already when he fought for control of the party's youth movement, and now he's hired Karl Rove to help run his overall political strategy.

Reinfeldt also delivered the keynote at the most recent top level meeting of NATO, even though Sweden is not a member. The 'fright' of the supposed Russian submarines in the Swedish archipelago was later found, through WikiLeaks cables, to be a 'ruse' developed by the CIA and NATO shortly after Bildt's delivery of the Palme submarine report.

And so on.

Clearly something is not right there.

Sweden in Afghanistan

But what does this have to do with Julian Assange, Marianne Ny, and Mutual Legal Assistance?

The key has long been thought to be Sweden's role in the conflict in Afghanistan where a relative of Anna Ardin has been one of the commanders of the Swedish forces. It's been postulated that the Swedes regarded the release of the Afghan War Diaries as an act of espionage against their 'kingdom'.

But there are caveats to making charges stick. Swedish law gets very tricky in those matters. And thus, it is postulated, the current (and otherwise inexplicable and indefensible) impasse.

Strange as it may seem, Sweden (Marianne Ny) can't charge Julian Assange with espionage if he's not on Swedish soil.

On Swedish Soil

Enter Flashback member longbow4y who's been studying the matter for quite some time. The following is his response to a direct question appearing just the other day at the forum, and it's not the first time he's touched on the subject.

> What does she hope to gain by getting him to come here?

My theory?

For Sweden to extradite someone to the US, the crime in question must also be a crime in Sweden.

See page 17 here: http://www.aklagare.se/PageFiles/3458/Utlämning.pdf

'For extradition it is required that, according to Swedish law, the crime represent a sentence of at least one year in prison.'

But Swedish law also states:

2 § Crimes committed outside the kingdom are judged by Swedish law and in Swedish courts if the crime has been committed:
1. By a Swedish citizen or by a foreigner resident in Sweden,
2. By a foreigner not resident in Sweden who, after the crime was committed, has become a Swedish citizen or taken up residence here in the kingdom, or someone who is a Danish, Finnish, Icelandic, or Norwegian citizen and resides here, or
3. By another type of foreigner resident in Sweden and when, according to Swedish law, the crime can result in prison in excess of six months.

So we cannot extradite or help with the extradition of someone from Sweden for espionage if the crime is not also a crime in Sweden. But for it to be a crime, a non-Swede must be on Swedish soil. Otherwise it's not a crime according to Swedish law and the individual cannot be extradited.

It's known that WikiLeaks received documents about Sweden without being in the country. But this is a crime for JA only if JA is on Swedish soil. And only once he's in the country and there's a crime according to, for example, criminal code chapter 19, can JA be extradited to the US. But only under those circumstances. Because if he's not in the country, his actions against Sweden's national security are not a crime in Sweden, and he cannot be extradited from Sweden to the US for the crime of espionage.

The short version: for Sweden to extradite Julian Assange to the US, the crime of espionage must be a crime in Sweden and Julian Assange must be on Swedish soil.

Swedish criminal code, chapter 19, et al

7 § One who, without intending to help foreign powers, without authorisation obtains, forwards, submits, or discloses information concerning a situation of a secret nature, the appearance of which for a foreign power can result in damage to the defence of the kingdom or for the care of the people in times of war, or circumstances of an extraordinary nature caused by war, or otherwise for the security of the realm, is sentenced, whether or not the information is accurate, for unauthorised access to secret documents to a fine or prison for up to two years. (1981:1165)

8 § If the crime mentioned in 7 § is judged to be aggravated, the sentence will be for aggravated unauthorised access to secret documents to prison for up to four years.

When judging the severity of the crime, it should especially be observed whether a foreign power received the documents or whether they were of a significantly dangerous nature with respect to ongoing warfare or concerned circumstances of great importance or if the suspect disclosed something which through public or other special duties was given under confidence. (1976:509)

9 § Whosoever through gross negligence forwards, submits, or dicloses such information as cited in 7 § is sentenced to negligence with secret documents to a fine or prison up to 6 months or, in times of war, to a fine or prison up to two years. (1981:1165)

Finally: I think these laws are what frightened AA and SW into silence. And likely our media as well.