Sureties must fulfil duty to ensure surrender
(Westminster Magistrates Court) The parties had given surety for a Julian Assange who had been granted bail. On his failure to surrender to bail, the recognizances were declared forfeit. The parties now appealed. They had not attended the hearing at which the declarations were made.
Held: The sureties had none of them sought to persuade Mr Assange to surrender. This was a matter of principle and admirable accordingly, and ‘I accept that the sureties all acted in good faith. I accept that they trusted Mr Assange to surrender himself as required. I accept that they followed the proceedings and made necessary arrangements to remain in contact with him. However, they failed in their basic duty, to ensure his surrender. They must have understood the risk and the concerns of the courts. Both this court and the High Court assessed that there were substantial grounds to believe the defendant would abscond, and that the risk could only be met by stringent conditions including the sureties. They have also, for reasons I have heard and understand, declined to exert such influence as they may have on Mr Assange to surrender.’ Each surety had part only of the recognizance forfeited.
Judge Howard Riddle SDJ
[2012] EW Misc 22 (MC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
See Also – Assange v The Swedish Prosecution Authority SC 30-May-2012
The defendant sought to resist his extradition under a European Arrest Warrant to Sweden to face charges of sexual assaults. He said that the prosecutor who sought the extradition was not a judicial authority within the Framework Decision.
Criminal Practice
Leading Case
Updated: 10 November 2021; Ref: scu.510058