Ecuador grants asylum to WikiLeaks' Assange
»Play Video
LONDON (AP) - He's won asylum in Ecuador, but Julian Assange is no closer to getting there.
The dramatic decision by the Latin American nation to identify the WikiLeaks founder as a political refugee is a symbolic boost for the embattled ex-hacker, but legal experts say that does little to help him avoid extradition to Sweden - and does much to drag Britain and Ecuador into a contentious international faceoff.
"We're at something of an impasse," lawyer Rebecca Niblock said shortly after the news broke. "It's not a question of law anymore. It's a question of politics and diplomacy."
The silver-haired Australian shot to international prominence in 2010 after he began publishing a huge trove of American diplomatic and military secrets - including a quarter million U.S. embassy cables that shed a harsh light on the backroom dealings of U.S. diplomats. Amid the ferment, two Swedish women accused him of sexual assault; Assange has been fighting extradition to Sweden ever since.
The convoluted saga took its latest twist on Thursday, when Ecuadorean Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino announced that he had granted political asylum to Assange, who had been holed up at the small, coastal nation's embassy since June 19. He said Ecuador was taking action because Assange faces a serious threat of unjust prosecution at the hands of U.S. officials.
Patino said there were "serious indications" that the United States could threaten Assange's "security, integrity and even his life," a nod to the fears expressed by Assange and others that the Swedish sex case is merely the opening gambit in a Washington-orchestrated plot to make him stand trial in the United States - something disputed by both by Swedish authorities and the women involved.
He said he'd tried to get guarantees from the Americans, the British, and the Swedes that Assange would not be extradited to the United States, but that all three had rebuffed him. He said it was clear that if Assange were extradited to the U.S. "he would not have a fair trial, could be judged by special or military courts and it's not implausible that cruel and degrading treatment could be applied, that he could be condemned to life in prison or the death penalty."
Patino's decision was warmly received by cheering pro-Assange demonstrators gathered outside the Edwardian-era embassy building, just down the street from the famous Harrods department store.
"It must have been a tough decision for Ecuador because they had pressure," said Alejandra Cazas, an 18-year-old British-Bolivian citizen outside the embassy. "Now they have to watch out that he arrives to Ecuador safely."
But British Foreign Secretary William Hague said Britain will not allow Assange safe passage out of the country.
"There is no legal basis for us to do so," he said.
He said Assange was wanted in Sweden to answer allegations of "serious sexual offenses" and that the extradition had nothing to do with the work of WikiLeaks or with the United States.
How Assange can get to Ecuador despite this obstacles was anyone's guess Thursday. Legal experts debated whether Assange could get safe passage in a diplomatic car, escape in an oversized diplomatic bag, or slip out when police relaxed their guard.
Some said he had little choice but to stay put - potentially for years on end.
Niblock, who practices at London law firm Kingsley Napley, said that staying in the embassy long-term "seems to be one of the few feasible options I can think of."
The diplomatic repercussions continued Thursday with an unlikely confrontation between Sweden and Ecuador.
In a mark of its anger over the asylum ruling, the Swedish Foreign Ministry said it had summoned Ecuador's ambassador to complain about the decision. The country's foreign minister, Carl Bildt, said in a message posted to Twitter that "our firm legal and constitutional system guarantees the rights of each and every one. We firmly reject any accusations to the contrary."
Ecuador's President Rafael Correa did seem to be any mood for compromise either, posting a tweet which read: "No one is going to frighten us."
The issue already seems to have frayed diplomatic ties between the U.K. and Ecuador. Britain's previous ambassador to Ecuador, Linda Cross, departed earlier this year and had been due to be replaced this month by Patrick Mullee. But his arrival has been delayed.
They could fray much further if Britain's decides to enforce a little-known 1987 law that gives the U.K. the right to enter the embassy to arrest Assange - a development most legal experts called unlikely and potentially dangerous.
The inviolability of embassies "is a fundamental premise of international law," said Niblock.
If Britain carried through with the move, "it would threaten their embassy premises around the world."
___
Solano reported from Quito, Ecuador. Associated Press writers Frank Bajak in Lima, Peru, Jill Lawless and Raissa Ioussouf in London, and Louise Nordstrom and Karl Ritter in Stockholm all contributed to this report.
The dramatic decision by the Latin American nation to identify the WikiLeaks founder as a political refugee is a symbolic boost for the embattled ex-hacker, but legal experts say that does little to help him avoid extradition to Sweden - and does much to drag Britain and Ecuador into a contentious international faceoff.
"We're at something of an impasse," lawyer Rebecca Niblock said shortly after the news broke. "It's not a question of law anymore. It's a question of politics and diplomacy."
The silver-haired Australian shot to international prominence in 2010 after he began publishing a huge trove of American diplomatic and military secrets - including a quarter million U.S. embassy cables that shed a harsh light on the backroom dealings of U.S. diplomats. Amid the ferment, two Swedish women accused him of sexual assault; Assange has been fighting extradition to Sweden ever since.
The convoluted saga took its latest twist on Thursday, when Ecuadorean Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino announced that he had granted political asylum to Assange, who had been holed up at the small, coastal nation's embassy since June 19. He said Ecuador was taking action because Assange faces a serious threat of unjust prosecution at the hands of U.S. officials.
Patino said there were "serious indications" that the United States could threaten Assange's "security, integrity and even his life," a nod to the fears expressed by Assange and others that the Swedish sex case is merely the opening gambit in a Washington-orchestrated plot to make him stand trial in the United States - something disputed by both by Swedish authorities and the women involved.
He said he'd tried to get guarantees from the Americans, the British, and the Swedes that Assange would not be extradited to the United States, but that all three had rebuffed him. He said it was clear that if Assange were extradited to the U.S. "he would not have a fair trial, could be judged by special or military courts and it's not implausible that cruel and degrading treatment could be applied, that he could be condemned to life in prison or the death penalty."
Patino's decision was warmly received by cheering pro-Assange demonstrators gathered outside the Edwardian-era embassy building, just down the street from the famous Harrods department store.
"It must have been a tough decision for Ecuador because they had pressure," said Alejandra Cazas, an 18-year-old British-Bolivian citizen outside the embassy. "Now they have to watch out that he arrives to Ecuador safely."
But British Foreign Secretary William Hague said Britain will not allow Assange safe passage out of the country.
"There is no legal basis for us to do so," he said.
He said Assange was wanted in Sweden to answer allegations of "serious sexual offenses" and that the extradition had nothing to do with the work of WikiLeaks or with the United States.
How Assange can get to Ecuador despite this obstacles was anyone's guess Thursday. Legal experts debated whether Assange could get safe passage in a diplomatic car, escape in an oversized diplomatic bag, or slip out when police relaxed their guard.
Some said he had little choice but to stay put - potentially for years on end.
Niblock, who practices at London law firm Kingsley Napley, said that staying in the embassy long-term "seems to be one of the few feasible options I can think of."
The diplomatic repercussions continued Thursday with an unlikely confrontation between Sweden and Ecuador.
In a mark of its anger over the asylum ruling, the Swedish Foreign Ministry said it had summoned Ecuador's ambassador to complain about the decision. The country's foreign minister, Carl Bildt, said in a message posted to Twitter that "our firm legal and constitutional system guarantees the rights of each and every one. We firmly reject any accusations to the contrary."
Ecuador's President Rafael Correa did seem to be any mood for compromise either, posting a tweet which read: "No one is going to frighten us."
The issue already seems to have frayed diplomatic ties between the U.K. and Ecuador. Britain's previous ambassador to Ecuador, Linda Cross, departed earlier this year and had been due to be replaced this month by Patrick Mullee. But his arrival has been delayed.
They could fray much further if Britain's decides to enforce a little-known 1987 law that gives the U.K. the right to enter the embassy to arrest Assange - a development most legal experts called unlikely and potentially dangerous.
The inviolability of embassies "is a fundamental premise of international law," said Niblock.
If Britain carried through with the move, "it would threaten their embassy premises around the world."
___
Solano reported from Quito, Ecuador. Associated Press writers Frank Bajak in Lima, Peru, Jill Lawless and Raissa Ioussouf in London, and Louise Nordstrom and Karl Ritter in Stockholm all contributed to this report.
Assange already released quite a bit of secret info on Ecuador. It was mainly about the CIA's assignation of political leaders in Ecuador and the backing of radical elements in the Ecuadorian population. I would expect to see war down south in the next couple of years. The US and Britain will try to continue its imperialism there. If the south is smart they will unify and work hard to get nuclear weapons to try and protect themselves from further tyranny. Its pretty easy to see who is causing the real problems around the world.
 @Blindman It's people like you that perpetuate these insane conspiracies.
 @keeper These nuts probably think Hugo Chavez is the best thing that every happened to Venezuala--which tells you alot about how little they think of real freedom.
 @LockesChild  @keeper Chavez is the best thing to happen to Venezuala. Venezuala is not under control or influenced by the west. Also the people don't trust the US for it's backing of the failed coup in 2002.
 @LockesChild  @keeper To think highly of real freedom, one has to know what it is first.
 @keeper  @Blindman Blindman is absolutely correct. I would hope that you at least know about Iran/Contra. Well, there are dozens more examples just like that. The USA is finally losing it's foothold in Central and South America. Finally some real democracy has taken hold in those countries. We should support that. I love my country, but we as Americans have to come to grips with what we have done in other parts of the world.Â
I wonder what secrets Assange has on Ecuador that he promised not to spill in exchange for asylum.Â
 @BobDobbs Most of the secrets about Ecuador was about American attempts to destablize the elected Socialist government. Remember the United States has a history to remove democratically elected governments that are socialist. Examples: 1973 Chilean coup d'état2002 Venezuelan coup d'état attemptHere is a great poster of America's 60 year history of the United States intervention in Latin America:http://www.soaw.org/presente/images/stories/artists/ilcinkhighressm.jpgÂ
 @bab5crusade And our media has continued to tell the stories that our state department tells them to tell us. Fox News has probably been the worst with their constant attacks and demonizing Hugo Chavez, a democratically elected leader.Â
Â
You never hear about the fact that Chavez is basically giving away heating oil to low income Americans in the northeast for free. He's been doing this for many years now. And the states have accepted the free heating oil and given it away to its poor residents to help them keep their homes warm in the harsh winters.Â
Â
Â
Free Assange!
Â
Viva Ecuador! I am glad that Ecuador is fighting against the bullying by the United Kingdom and the United States. The UK has no right to bully a nation with a threat of invading the sovereign territory of the Ecuador Embassy.  The UK would not be threatening to raid the Russian or Chinese embassy if Assange was being protected by either one of those nations. Â
This comment has been deleted
The death penalty is a very real threat. If he had gotten extradited to Sweden he would have been transfered to the US where he would have went before a secret military court and would have been found guilty of a crime that was not committed in Amerika or by an Amerikan. Sweden has no legal reason to have Julian extradited. He has been charged with no crime any where. Ecuador is well aware of how our government operates.Its own presidents have been assassinated by the US. If Britain enters the embassy it will be an act of war and will make central and south american countries unify and then Britain will have to fight a whole continent. The world is being run by morons.
 @Blindman If you disdain this country so much, why don't you move somewhere else?
 @keeper This attitude would fit in really well in 1939 Germany.
 @caphillkid Congratulations on ending all intelligent commentary (though the insane post by the appropriately-named Blindman was not much of a start) by invoking Nazis, thus proving that you haven't the wit to actually respond to keeper and had to resort to a tired old cliche of inferring he was like a Nazi.
@Blindman Ok, I don't know the legal system..specially when it comes to extradfiting somebody...but why does Sweden have no geal reason if he is  faces sexual assault allegations? Won't that turn into charges when they got him? And I am really just asking because I don't know, not mend sarcastically.
I assume the foreign minister is not a stupid man, so his comment about the "death penalty" is just being melodramatic.
Â
If he knew anything about US justice he'd know that we fall heavily on wrist slaps and tut-tutting even for constant and repetitive perpetrators of felonies.
So let him live forever in the Ecuadorean embassy building. I am certain the socialist thugs that run Ecuador will not shirk their responsibility to feed and house this scumbag. Maybe even provide him with a woman or two to abuse.
 @LockesChild You don't know a damn thing about Ecuador. Why don't you go run your ignorant mouth at foxandfriends.com
 @caphillkid Tell us about who runs Ecuador. Tell us about the relationship with that socialist toad, Chavez. Then come back and accuse others of being ignorant. Like babs, you will reduce the chance of looking like an uninformed fool.
 @LockesChild  @caphillkid Lets see, the people of Ecuador elected him twice to help lead a socialist revolution. Hell in the 2nd election he won with 52% of the vote. Also he approval rating is in the 70s-80% range. The Latin American people are tired of being bullied by the United States. The United States has no right to control latin America.Â
 @LockesChild There is no evidence of the rape accusations nor he is being charged. Why would UK spend time and money on extraditing a man for questioning? The UK is getting him because the United States want him. The United States doesn't like being embarrassed.Â
 @bab5crusade Assange was to be extradited to Sweded, not GB. Not the USA. Read up before you post--you will reduce the chances of looking like a fool.
 @LockesChild. UK to Sweden and then to USA for unfair trial and torture.Â
@LockesChild A woman or two to abuse? That's Ecuadors stance, and a smart one, that the media has him guilty already. Where did you get your facts? Did he abuse you personally or are you one of the sheep who believes everything you hear?
@Headwrench What you are saying is that the woman in Sweden are lying. How do you know? Do you know more then we do? Or you just one of thos sheeps that believes in everything you hear?
Â