A defense attorney for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange claims his client could face the death penalty if he’s extradited to Sweden and if that country then passes him to US authorities.

Defense attorney Mark Stephens made the assertion in a 35-page document (PDF) released Tuesday, which forecasts the arguments Stephens intends to make in a London court next month to fight Assange’s extradition to Sweden in an ongoing sex-crimes investigation. Assange is wanted in Sweden for questioning in the case, though he has not been charged with a crime.

Stephens argued in the document that extraditing Assange could violate the European Convention on Human Rights if the US then tried to extradite him from Sweden or, worse, grab him through an "illegal rendition." The highly charged reference is to the "extraordinary renditions" that the Central Intelligence Agency performed to illegally nab suspected terrorists and send them to countries overseas where they could be tortured in secret prisons.

It is submitted that there is a real risk that, if extradited to Sweden, the U.S. will seek his extradition and/or illegal rendition to the USA, where there will be a real risk of him being detained at Guantanamo Bay or elsewhere, in conditions which would breach Article 3 of the ECHR. Indeed, if Mr. Assange were rendered to the USA, without assurances that the death penalty would not be carried out, there is a real risk that he could be made subject to the death penalty. It is well-known that prominent figures have implied, if not stated outright, that Mr. Assange should be executed.

A federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia is believed to be investigating possible criminal charges against Assange in relation to classified documents that his organization obtained from a source and published. If charges were filed in the US, Stephens asserted that Sweden was likely to "bow to US pressure and/or rely naively on diplomatic assurances from the USA that Mr. Assange would not be mistreated."

The Swedish prosecutors' office, however, noted on its website last year that in a case where a suspect wanted in Sweden is arrested in another European Union country, Sweden cannot legally extradite the suspect to a non-EU nation without obtaining permission from the arresting country. "Sweden cannot, without such consent, extradite a person, for example to the USA," prosecutors wrote.

In arguing that his client might face the death penalty, Stephens quoted right-wing US politicians and pundits who've called for Assange's execution. He did not explain what legal authority the US might use to seek the death penalty against Assange. Pfc. Private Manning, who is facing court martial for allegedly providing WikiLeaks with classified information, has not been charged with a capital offense. Indeed, no US espionage case—including many involving much more sensitive information than that released by WikiLeaks—has resulted in the death penalty since Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed in 1953.

Stephens further argued in the document that Swedish prosecutor Marianne Ny had abused the Swedish and UK legal process by attempting to extradite Assange without charging him with a crime, and for alleged offenses that are not subject to extradition. He also contradicted Ny's assertion that Sweden had issued an arrest warrant for Assange only after exhausting all "normal procedures" for questioning him. The WikiLeaks founder, he wrote, had made himself available to Swedish prosecutors for questioning when he was in that country last year, but the prosecutor's office had failed to follow-up. The office had also given Assange permission to leave the country only to then issue an arrest warrant to force him to return to Sweden for questioning without ever first making a formal request to him to come in for an interview in the UK.

"The proper, proportionate and legal means of requesting a person’s questioning in the UK in these circumstances is through Mutual Legal Assistance," Stephens wrote, adding that "there is nothing to show that the Prosecutor ever sought to engage the usual MLA procedures for questioning Mr. Assange."

Stephens released the document revealing the defense arguments following a bare-bones case-management hearing for Assange in the Belmarsh magistrates' court. A two-day hearing to address the actual extradition will be held on February 7 and 8. Should the judge at that hearing order Assange to be extradited to Sweden, his lawyers can appeal the decision in the High Court and then the Supreme Court.

The legal document, released by Stephens at Assange's request, touches on the allegations made by two Swedish women who are at the center of the sex-crimes investigation of Assange.

It also reveals officially for the first time the names of the two alleged rape victims, whose identities—although speculated about on the Internet—have been withheld until now.

During the preliminary hearing, which lasted less than 15 minutes, the presiding judge eased some of the court's earlier restrictions on Assange, who is currently out on bail and staying in a country mansion while he awaits the extradition hearing. The judge ruled that Assange no longer has to wear an electronic bracelet to monitor his whereabouts, and he will be allowed to remain in London during the two-day extradition hearing in February rather than be forced to return to the district where the mansion is located.

In recent events, a US prosecutor overseeing an investigation into possible charges against Assange in this country has served Twitter with a sealed court order seeking information on several people connected with WikiLeaks. Twitter got the order unsealed and notified the targets, who now plan to challenge the records demand.

Listing image by AP/Matt Dunham