This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/int/news/-/news/uk-16027942

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Julian Assange wins right to pursue extradition fight Julian Assange wins right to pursue extradition fight
(40 minutes later)
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has won the right to petition the UK Supreme Court in his fight against extradition to Sweden.Wikileaks founder Julian Assange has won the right to petition the UK Supreme Court in his fight against extradition to Sweden.
He lost a High Court battle last month to be extradited over alleged sex offences, which he denies.He lost a High Court battle last month to be extradited over alleged sex offences, which he denies.
Judges refused Mr Assange permission to appeal directly to the Supreme Court - but said his case raised "a question of general public importance".Judges refused Mr Assange permission to appeal directly to the Supreme Court - but said his case raised "a question of general public importance".
He can now directly ask the Supreme Court to look at his case.He can now directly ask the Supreme Court to look at his case.
However, Mr Assange, who was at the London court to hear the judges' ruling, still has no automatic right to be heard by the highest court in the UK.However, Mr Assange, who was at the London court to hear the judges' ruling, still has no automatic right to be heard by the highest court in the UK.
'Politically motivated''Politically motivated'
Mr Assange, 40, is founder of the whistleblowing website Wikileaks, which has angered the United States by releasing hundreds of thousands of classified US documents.Mr Assange, 40, is founder of the whistleblowing website Wikileaks, which has angered the United States by releasing hundreds of thousands of classified US documents.
The Australian faces extradition over accusations he raped a woman and sexually molested another in Stockholm in August last year. He denies the allegations.The Australian faces extradition over accusations he raped a woman and sexually molested another in Stockholm in August last year. He denies the allegations.
Mr Assange was arrested in London a year ago on a European Arrest Warrant and has been living at the country estate of a supporter under stringent bail conditions. Mr Assange was arrested in London a year ago on a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) and has been living at the country estate of a supporter under stringent bail conditions. He claims his arrest was politically motivated and linked to the activities of Wikileaks.
He claims his arrest was politically motivated and linked to the activities of Wikileaks. District Judge Howard Riddle ruled in February that Mr Assange should be extradited to face investigation following a hearing at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court in central London. The decision was upheld at the High Court last month.
District Judge Howard Riddle ruled in February that Mr Assange should be extradited to face investigation following a hearing at City of Westminster Magistrates' Court in central London. Mr Assange attempted to appeal the decision on two grounds.
'Unfair and unlawful' He argued the highest court should consider whether his extradition would be unlawful because the request was made by a "partisan prosecutor working for the executive" and whether he could be defined as "the accused" even though no decision has been taken to prosecute him.
The decision was upheld by the High Court on 2 November after judges rejected claims that extraditing Mr Assange would be "unfair and unlawful". 'Quickly as possible'
Following the hearing he said: "I have not been charged with any crime in any country. On Monday the High Court certified that the case raised the question of whether the Swedish prosecutor who issued the EAW against Mr Assange was a "judicial authority". Mr Assange's lawyers argue the prosecutor was not, and the warrant was therefore invalid.
"The European Arrest Warrant is so restrictive that it prevents UK courts from considering the facts of a case." Mark Summers, appearing for Mr Assange, said: "Public prosecutors should not, in any circumstances, be permitted to issue EAWs."
Mr Assange attempted to appeal to the Supreme Court on two grounds. One of the two judges, Sir John Thomas, told Mr Summers the court's view was that it had "very little doubt that, as a matter of law, the prosecutor was within the scheme" for issuing warrants, and Mr Assange's chances of success in the Supreme Court were "extraordinarily slim".
He had argued the highest court should consider whether his extradition would be unlawful because the request was made by a "partisan prosecutor working for the executive" and whether he could be defined as "the accused" even though no decision has been taken to prosecute him. But the judge said the court felt "constrained" to certify that the case raised a question of general public importance.
However, it would be left to the Supreme Court to decide whether to give Assange actual leave to appeal, it was ruled.
Sir John said: "If leave is granted by the Supreme Court we would, for obvious reasons, ask that the point is decided as quickly as possible."
Outside the court Mr Assange's lawyer, Gareth Peirce, said his legal team had 14 days to submit a written petition to the Supreme Court.
She told reporters that if the court refused to hear the request then Mr Assange would have exhausted all legal avenues in Britain.
The BBC's Luisa Baldini, at the High Court, tweets that Mr Assange said the judges made the right decision as he left court.