British Government Considering Talks With Ecuador Regarding Julian Assange
The Wikileaks author is currently staying at the Ecuadorian embassy in London
The UK government is considering a request from Ecuador to hold talks on the future of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, the Foreign Office has said.
It confirmed Ecuador's foreign minister Ricardo Patino, who will visit Mr Assange this month, had offered to meet Foreign Secretary William Hague.
Mr Assange has lived in the Ecuadorean embassy in London for a year, having been granted political asylum there.
He faces extradition to Sweden over sex allegations, which he denies.
Once in Sweden, he fears onward extradition to the US where he could face charges over the release of top secret documents by Wikileaks.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Assange has never been charged with a crime, he's only "wanted for questioning" by Swedish police about some very dubious accusations.
So why did - and are - the British government putting so much effort into his extradition? Why did they hire the UK's top extradition lawyer? There's far more to this than both the British and the Swedish government are admitting.
Could Assange's fears about American persecution be real? Yet he's a journalist and so shouldn't his activities be protected by the US constitution?