It is indeed for the courts to decide, it's just all the sharp practice that's stands between where he is right now and that court in session means no fooker trusts people with interests to do the right things.
Integrity is so sparse that those with vested interests will use any and all means to get what they desire, which ofc in any true world of decency would suggest the constitution isn't worth the paper it is written on.

Why should he dictate terms? The alleged crime was based there so that's where he should go to answer the charges. That's what would happen with everyone else surely.

Julian live now !

The beurette on the left would get it..

he's an unscrupulous delusional narcissistic prick of the highest order.

I'm not watching but the argument that you are detained by somebody simply by not having freedom is pretty flimsy.

He isn't dictating terms, it's Ecuador that doesn't recognise the extradition request.

The UN Panel have decided he is detained.....good enough for me.

Nilihism even.

Assange is guilty of not adding more 'f uck you' entertainment though I reckon.
What's wrong with a bit a hanging your arse out the window or pressing your face against the glass in fake mockery?
Throwing screwed up paper at the plod wouldn't go amiss either.

If he just accepts he's on borrowed time and makes the most of it to lambast and satirise the establishment then at least he's doing something.

What an idiotic decision by a panel made up of apparently non lawyers, who are clearly as dim as you like.
He's not being detained. He can leave any time he likes! He'll probably then be lifted and taken to the country that put out an arrest warrant, which is entirely normal. FFS if people can't put out arrest warrants and give them to other countries, which is what the UN are saying, international rule of law will break down and criminals will laugh their heads off. You'd have to have an IQ below 80 not to understand this, which doesn't say much for the UN.

I'm sure the usual conspiracy theorists and lefie wingnuts won't see any sense though.

Yes, shush lefie wingnuts you

It's not binding anyway. You wonder what the salaries and expense of this to the UN (in turn paid by taxpayers) is to come to a decision that is pointless in the first place. I wonder if a Kinnock or Miliband was on that particular gravy Train.

"A Freedom of Information request submitted by the Hazel Press news organization has revealed that Sweden has granted 44 requests to interview witnesses or suspects in the UK since 2010, the Press Association reports."


Asking for something that was granted to 44 other people doesn't sound unreasonable or like 'dictating terms' to me.

Yes it is, but their authority isnt universal is it?

he could convert to Islam™ - then maybe the Swedish authorities would go easier on him

He will have to ask his wife , first !

Is Mr. Assange accused of ’rape’?

Over the past year, new information has emerged that both women explicitly deny having been raped by Mr. Assange.
In a statement to the UK Supreme Court, the prosecutor acknowledged that the complainants wished only to ask the police for advice about HIV tests, having discovered they’d had both had sex with Mr. Assange. (There has never been an allegation Mr. Assange has HIV.)
Neither of the women wished to lodge a formal complaint.

The woman of whom Mr. Assange is accused of the offence of "lesser rape" (a technical term in Swedish law) sent an SMS to a friend saying that she "did not want to accuse JA [of] anything" and "it was the police who made up the charges".
The other woman tweeted in 2013 that she had never been raped. Both women’s testimonies say that they consented to the sex. A senior prosecutor already dismissed the ’rape’ accusation, saying that there were no grounds for accusing Mr. Assange on this basis.
But a third prosecutor, lobbied by a politician who was running for attorney general, took over the investigation and resurrected the accusations against Mr. Assange.
Due to the great number of incorrect reports of, it is best to rely on primary source documents in this matter, which are on the internet and the UK Supreme Court "Agreed Statements of Facts" agreed to by the UK, the Swedish authoritiesm and Mr. Assange’s legal team.

I repeat - the USA want to lock him up for ever. It really is that simple.  You don't upset them the way he has.

While I dont agree with the determination of the UN it surely must now raise the question 'what are you going to do about it then?'
If they decide Britain is in the wrong then will they sanction them?
If they do nothing then what is the point of it and them?

Hammond missed out saying 'we asked america what we make of it all and they said carry on'

The woman of whom Mr. Assange is accused of the offence of "lesser rape" (a technical term in Swedish law) sent an SMS to a friend saying that she "did not want to accuse JA [of] anything" and "it was the police who made up the charges".
The other woman tweeted in 2013 that she had never been raped.
Both women’s testimonies say that they consented to the sex.
A senior prosecutor already dismissed the ’rape’ accusation, saying that there were no grounds for accusing Mr. Assange on this basis.
But a third prosecutor, lobbied by a politician who was running for attorney general, took over the investigation and resurrected the accusations against Mr. Assange.