The diplomatic crisis between Ecuador and the United Kingdom in 2012 refers to the crisis that occurred when the Ecuadorian government clashed with its counterpart in the United Kingdom over the protection provided by Ecuador to the creator of the WikiLeaks website Julian Assange, at its embassy in the United Kingdom, when he was under house arrest in London awaiting extradition to Sweden, where the prosecution wanted to question him in relation to four charges of sexual assault.[1]
On 19 June, Assange requested asylum in Ecuador, and his request was granted almost two months later on 16 August.[2] This measure was described as "negative" by British Foreign SecretaryWilliam Hague, who stated that Assange would be arrested when he left the facilities and added that diplomatic asylum was not applicable in his country.[3]
The Ecuadorian government justified its decision by arguing that Assange's human rights could be violated in a hypothetical extradition from Sweden to the United States. However, the United Kingdom responded, arguing that it was "its duty" to bring to justice those wanted for such an extradition.
For its part, the US Federal Government, through one of its spokespeople, Victoria Nuland, said that the justice system in that country has no requirements for Assange. Sweden (the country that requires Assange) expressed its disagreement with the measure and called the Ecuadorian ambassador in that country for consultations. On the other hand, the governments of Venezuela, Uruguay and Argentina supported the decision of the Ecuadorian Government.
That same day, the Organization of American States (OAS) agreed to meet to discuss the crisis. On 18 August, Kristinn Hrafnsson from WikiLeaks, said in a telephone conversation that Assange would speak from the embassy on August 19 about his situation and the crisis, but that he could not give further details "for security reasons".[4]
Julian Assange founded the WikiLeaks website in 2006, which he used to publish thousands of classified files from different governments around the world, including the United States. The documents were published on several occasions and were described by some governments as "improper". The publications led to the blocking of WikiLeaks funds (by the banks where they were held).[5]
In September 2010, Swedish Chief Prosecutor Marianne Ny ordered Assange's arrest for questioning in connection with two allegations of sexual assault. Following the prosecutor's request, Interpol issued a red notice (highest priority) seeking his arrest and extradition to Sweden in connection with alleged rape, sexual abuse and coercion charges.[6]
In early December (of the same year) it became known that Assange might be hiding in southern England. And indeed, on 7 December, he turned himself in to the Metropolitan Police in London and was subsequently granted bail.[7]
Assange's lawyers began a legal battle to prevent the extradition, arguing that the charges arose from a "dispute over unprotected but consensual sex" and that he would be taken from Sweden to the United States to be charged with espionage.[8] On 24 February 2011 - in accordance with the request made by the Swedish courts - a British judge declared Assange's extradition to Sweden appropriate. The defence exhausted all possible appeals and postponements, but the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom rejected their arguments and ratified the granting of extradition on 13 June 2012.[9]
Embassy of the Republic of Ecuador in London, 16 August 2012
On Tuesday 19 June 2012, Assange violated his bail and escaped to take refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. Scotland Yard officials went to the diplomatic headquarters to surround the perimeter and arrest Assange when he left the jurisdiction of the British police. That same day, Assange requested political asylum from the Ecuadorian government, to which - as an immediate but not definitive response - the government of Rafael Correa preferred to abstain from making its decision public, arguing that it would not distract public attention from the ongoing 2012 Summer Olympics.
The situation sparked protests in support of Assange, who activists claimed the case was political persecution.[citation needed]
Granting asylum
On 14 August 2012, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa said that Julian Assange's request for political asylum was being studied as of that date by the authorities of his country and that the case would be evaluated taking into account, among other things, the statements made by the affected party in which he denounces his possible extradition to the United States, where, if found guilty of other charges, he could be sentenced to the death penalty, and that the human rights and security and physical integrity of Assange must be guaranteed.[10]
On August 15, 2012, Ecuadorian Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño - after a press conference- denounced that the British Government sent a note to the Ecuadorian ambassador in London, in which he had threatened to enter the diplomatic headquarters 'by force' to arrest Assange. The Ecuadorian Government described the situation as 'unfriendly';[11][12][13][14] the Government of David Cameron did not refer to it. A day later, Patiño made public the decision of his country's Government, in which Assange's request was granted, arguing Ecuador 's sovereignty regarding the request and the moral obligation to guarantee the human rights of the accused.[15]
Threat of entry to the Ecuadorian embassy
The day before the asylum was granted, the United Kingdom threatened to storm the Ecuadorian embassy in London to capture Julian Assange.[16]
Russia[20] through the then President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, said that the United Kingdom has a double standard by granting political asylum to Boris Berezovskt or Akhmed Zakaiev, "people who have blood up to their elbows, who took up arms on our territory, who killed, are hiding in Great Britain." and that denying safe passage to Assange is more of a political issue.
ALBA : Declared that entering the Ecuadorian Embassy would have serious consequences for the world, even declaring: "We reject the intimidating threats uttered by spokesmen of the United Kingdom government for violating the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity of nations".[21]
UNASUR: Signed the Guayaquil Declaration in support of Ecuador, a document signed on August 19, 2012, with the participation of the foreign ministers of the member states. The document states that "On August 15, the Government of the Republic of Ecuador publicly reported having received a note from the United Kingdom threatening to “take action to arrest Mr. Assange at the current premises of the Embassy” (of Ecuador) invoking its national law on Diplomatic and Consular Premises of 1987 (Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987)", adding that "The United Nations Security Council, in Press Release SC/10463 of November 29, 2011, condemned in the strongest terms violations of diplomatic immunity and recalled the fundamental principle of the inviolability of diplomatic missions and consular offices of receiving States in relation to the provisions of the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.[22]
32 of the 34 members of the Organization of American States (OAS) supported Ecuador and agreed to reiterate "the full validity of the principles and norms that regulate diplomatic relations between States" and that "these principles and norms constitute fundamental rules to ensure peaceful coexistence among all countries that make up the international community ." The inter-American organization did not comment on granting asylum to Assange nor did it mention the alleged threats from the United Kingdom. Canada was the only State that did not support the resolution, although the United States expressed a reservation about the phrase by which the member States express "their solidarity and support for the Government of the Republic of Ecuador."[23][24]
The Andean Parliament rejected a possible violation of the jurisdiction of the Ecuadorian embassy in London by the United Kingdom, and gave its support to Ecuador for the asylum granted to Julian Assange.[25]
Intellectuals such as Noam Chomsky and Naomi Wolf, important Hollywood personalities such as directors Oliver Stone and Michael Moore or actor Danny Glover, comedian Bill Maher —who donated a million dollars to Barack Obama for his re-election— or Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the 'Pentagon Papers', as well as the famous doctor Patch Adams are some of the more than 4,000 signatories of a letter that the organization Just Foreign Policy sent to the Ecuadorian Embassy in London on August 21. In the letter they urge the president of that country, Rafael Correa, to execute Julian Assange's request for asylum to avoid the risk of being extradited to the United States.[30]
Neutral
European Union: The European Union as a whole did not comment on the case, saying that it was "a bilateral diplomatic matter." They did, however, urge both countries to resolve the conflict through dialogue.[31]
Estados Unidos y Australia: The US and Australian governments have said they will not take sides. The United States has said it does not agree with the move, Australia has made preparations in the event that Assange is extradited to the US.
Chile: The Chilean government, for its part, refused to take sides in the situation, stating that "it is a problem between Ecuador and Great Britain" and that "they will have to resolve it bilaterally".[32]
Opposition
Reino Unido: British Foreign SecretaryWilliam Hague said that the decision of the Ecuadorian government is regrettable. And that the granting of asylum "will not change things", since Scotland Yard - he added - will remain ready for the immediate arrest and subsequent extradition of Assange. Therefore, the safe conduct that Assange needs to leave - as an asylum seeker - British soil will not be granted to him.[33]
Sweden: The Swedish government also regretted Ecuador's decision. It called the ambassador of that country in Sweden for consultations. On the other hand, it has explained that Sweden does not extradite anyone to a State that can apply the death penalty to the extradited person.[34]
Journalism associations and part of the world press believe that President Rafael Correa has adopted such a measure to improve his image, affected by his clashes with the Ecuadorian media and by the accusations he has received of restricting press freedom.[35]
The Ecuadorian community residing in England led by Luis Felipe Tilleria, carried out 4 plans against the granting of asylum.
Mario Vargas Llosa has said that Assange "is a fugitive from justice who uses his aura as a martyr of freedom of expression to avoid responding to the accusations against him.[36]
Reactions within Ecuador
Some Ecuadorian opposition leaders have described President Correa's decision to grant asylum to Julian Assange as paradoxical.[37]
According to Andrés Oppenheimer, in El Nuevo Herald, the Ecuadorian journalist Emilio Palacio - who has been prosecuted by the Ecuadorian president - has stated that Correa's campaign in favour of Assange has the purpose of both repairing his image as an "enemy" of freedom of the press, as well as gaining political space to become the leader of ALBA after the death of Hugo Chávez. Statements rejected by President Correa, who said that the former journalist of the newspaper El Universo was lying about the reasons why he was prosecuted by him.
^Joseba Elola (8 December 2010). "La fiscalía sueca presenta cuatro cargos de agresión sexual". El País. Retrieved 20 August 2012. El ideólogo y fundador de Wikileaks se enfrenta ahora a la justicia, pero no por un caso de espionaje, sino para responder a cuatro cargos de agresión sexual
^Joseba Elola (14 June 2012). "La Corte Suprema británica rechaza el recurso de Julian Assange". El País. Retrieved 20 August 2012. El Supremo británico también hizo ayer, al comunicar su decisión, un ejercicio de autocrítica y dio la razón en un aspecto a la abogada Rose. En su sentencia del pasado 30 de mayo, los jueces deslizaron erróneamente la palabra "acusado", para referirse a Assange, cuando lo cierto es que el australiano aún no ha sido formalmente acusado de nada: lo que existe es una petición de extradición para interrogarle. La fiscalía sueca le reclama para estudiar si abre un caso contra él ante las denuncias que dos mujeres suecas presentaron en su contra en agosto de 2010. La denuncia de una de ellas podría desembocar en una acusación de violación.
^Joseba Elola (8 December 2010). "La fiscalía sueca presenta cuatro cargos de agresión sexual". El País. Retrieved 20 August 2012. Los abogados de Assange reclaman que las acusaciones derivan de una "disputa sobre sexo sin protección pero consentido" y arguyen que las mujeres solo presentaron la denuncia tras haber conocido cada una de la relación de la otra
^Yolanda Monge/Eva Sáiz (24 August 2012). "Tibio apoyo de la OEA a Ecuador en el 'caso Assange'". El País. Retrieved 25 August 2012. La representante sueca ha asegurado que su país no extradita a nadie a un Estado que pueda aplicar la pena de muerte sobre el extraditado
^Redacción Política y agencias (22 August 2012). "Asilo a Assange no aplaca las críticas al Gobierno por ataques a la prensa". El Comercio. Archived from the original on 13 March 2016. Retrieved 25 August 2012. El Gobierno ecuatoriano intenta que el asilo a Julián Assange levante su imagen en el exterior, cuestionada por sus juicios y ataques contra la prensa privada
^El País (26 August 2012). "Julian Assange en el balcón". El País. Retrieved 26 August 2012. En realidad, el fundador de WikiLeaks no es objeto en estos momentos siquiera de una investigación judicial en los Estados Unidos ni este país ha hecho pedido alguno reclamándolo a nadie para enfrentarlo a un tribunal. El supuesto riesgo de que, si es entregado a la justicia sueca, el gobierno de Suecia pueda enviarlo a Estados Unidos es, por ahora, una presunción desprovista de todo fundamento y no tiene otro objeto que rodear al personaje de un aura de mártir de la libertad que ciertamente no se merece. La justicia sueca no lo reclama por sus hazañas —mejor dicho, infidencias— informáticas, sino por las acusaciones de violación y acoso sexual formuladas contra él por dos ciudadanas de ese país. Así lo ha entendido la Corte Suprema de Gran Bretaña y por eso decidió transferirlo a Suecia, cuyo sistema judicial, por lo demás, es, al igual que el británico, uno de los más independientes y confiables del mundo. De manera que el señor Assange no es en la actualidad una víctima de la libertad de expresión, sino un prófugo que utiliza ese pretexto para no tener que responder a las acusaciones que pesan sobre él como presunto delincuente sexual.
^Sabrina Gelman (17 August 2012). "¿Qué pretende Correa con el asilo a Assange?". El Imparcial. Retrieved 25 August 2012. Que Correa sea el protector y el abanderado de los derechos del polémico periodista, más que una dualidad es para algunos analistas una estrategia orquestada por el gobernante para lavar su imagen de cara a su reelección en los comicios de febrero de 2013, ya que se ha visto seriamente comprometida ante la comunidad internacional por las dudas que siembra su Ejecutivo en cuanto a la forma que tiene de comprender el ejercicio de la democracia
