 |
| Republic of Ecuador Embassy in London threatened by UK officials |
Excerpt, minor editing by Carolyn Bennett
“The Government of Ecuador faithful to its tradition to
protect those who seek shelter in its territory or in the premises of its
diplomatic missions [decided] to grant diplomatic asylum to the citizen Julian
Assange.”
After “carrying out a fair and objective assessment of the
situation exposed by Mr. Assange” with attention to the requester’s sayings,
argumentations and fears [fears that led him to exercise his human right of
seeking and receiving asylum in the Embassy of Ecuador in the United Kingdom], indications
allowed the Government of Ecuador “to assume that there may be a political
persecution or that such persecution may be produced if opportune and necessary
measures are not taken to avoid it.”
Grounds for Ecuador’s grant of asylum (excerpt)
That Julian Assange is a
communication professional internationally awarded for his struggle on freedom
of expression, freedom of press and human rights in general;
That Mr. Assange shared with the
global population privileged documented information that was generated by
different sources, and that affected officials, countries and organizations;
That there are serious indications
of retaliation by the country or countries that produced the information
disclosed by Mr. Assange, retaliation that can put at risk his safety,
integrity and even his life;
That, despite the diplomatic
efforts carried out by the Ecuadorian State, the countries from which
guarantees have been requested to protect the life and safety of Mr. Assange,
have denied to provide them;
That, there is a certainty of the
Ecuadorian authorities that an extradition to a third country outside the
European Union is feasible without the proper guarantees for his safety and
personal integrity;
That the judicial evidence shows
clearly that, given an extradition to the United States, Mr. Assange would not
have a fair trial, he could be judged by a special or military court, and it is
not unlikely that he would receive a cruel and demeaning treatment and he would
be condemned to a life sentence or the death penalty, which would not respect
his human rights;
That, even when indeed Mr. Assange
has to respond to the investigation open in Sweden, Ecuador is aware that the
Swedish prosecutor’s office has had a contradictory attitude that prevented Mr.
Assange from the total exercise of the legitimate right to defense;
That Ecuador is convinced that the
procedural rights of Mr. Assange have been infringed during that investigation:
That Ecuador has verified that Mr.
Assange does not count with the adequate protection and help that he should
receive from the State of which he is a citizen;
That, according to several public
statements and diplomatic communications made by officials from Great Britain,
Sweden and the United States, it is deduced that those governments would not
respect the international conventions and treaties and would give priority to
internal laws of secondary hierarchy, contravening explicit norms of universal
application; and,
That, if Mr. Assange is reduced to
preventive prison in Sweden (as it is usual in that country), it would initiate
a chain of events that will prevent the adoption of preventive measures to
avoid his extradition to a third country.
“The Ecuadorian Government,” the official statement said, “considers
that these arguments back up Julian Assange’s fears; thus, he can be a victim
of political persecution as a consequence of his determined defense to freedom
of expression and freedom of press as well as his position in condemning abuses that power confers in different
countries ─ aspects that make Mr. Assange think that, in any given moment, a
situation may come where his life, safety or personal integrity will be in
danger.”
 |
| Universal Declaration of Human Rights |
The Government of Ecuador trusts that the United Kingdom will offer as soon as possible the guarantees of safe conduct necessary and pertinent to the situation of the asylum requester, so their Governments [Ecuador and the UK] can with their actions honor the fidelity they owe to the international laws and institutions that both nations have contributed to shaping along their common history.
The Government of Ecuador also trusts to maintain inalterable the excellent bonds of friendship and mutual respect that unite Ecuador and the United Kingdom and their respective people, confident as they are in the promotion and defense of the same principles and values, and because they share similar concerns about democracy, peace, Good Living, which can only be possible if the fundamental rights of all people are respected.
Sources and notes
“Statement of the Government of the Republic of Ecuador on
the asylum request of Julian Assange,” NEWS RELEASES OF THE FOREIGN AFFAIRS,
TRADE AND INTEGRATION MINISTRY, August 16, 2012, Carrión E1-76 y Av. 10 de
Agosto (593 2) 299-3200
Quito – Ecuador, Foreign Affairs, Trade and Integration
Ministry © 2009 - 2010
webmast@mmrree.gov.ec Republic of Ecuador, http://www.mmrree.gob.ec/eng/2012/com042.asp
More from Ecuador’s official statement
Investigation
During the course of its investigation in considering Julian
Assange’s request for political asylum to Ecuador, the Ecuadorian Government held
“dialogues of high diplomatic level … with the United Kingdom, Sweden and the
United States.”
In the course of the conversations, [Ecuador] “appealed to
obtain from the United Kingdom the strictest guarantees Julian Assange faces,
with no obstacles, the judicial process open in Sweden.”
UK fails to respond
Such guarantees include that once his legal responsibilities [are met] in Sweden he would not be extradited to a third country; this is, the guarantee that the specialty figure will not be applied.
Unfortunately, and despite repeated exchanges of texts, the
United Kingdom never gave proof of wanting to achieve political compromises,
limiting to repeat the content of the legal texts.
Sweden fails to engage
Julian Assange’s lawyers requested the Swedish justice to take statements of Julian Assange in the premises of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Ecuador translated officially to the Swedish authorities its will to facilitate this interview with the purpose of not intervening or [thwarting] the judicial process that is carried out in Sweden. This is a perfectly legal and possible measure. Sweden did not accept it.
On the other hand, Ecuador searched the possibility that the Swedish Government would establish guarantees to avoid the onward extradition of Assange to the United States. Again, the Swedish Government rejected any commitment on that sense.
United States fails to respond
Finally, Ecuador directed a communication to the Government of the United States to know officially its position on the Assange’s case. The consultations referred to the following:
If there is a legal process in
course or the intention to carry out such process against Julian Assange and/
or the founders of the Wikileaks organization
In the case of the above being
truth, what kind of legislation, in which conditions and under which maximum
penalties would those people be subjected
If there is the intention of
requesting the extradition of Julian Assange to the United States
The answer of the United States has been that they cannot offer information on the Assange’s case, with the allegation that it is a bilateral matter between Ecuador and the United Kingdom.
___________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment