Julian Assange will continue to face arrest if he leaves the Ecuadorian embassy, after a judge ruled that the arrest warrant against the WikiLeaks founder was still valid.

But after the senior district judge Emma Arbuthnot ruled against Assange on Tuesday, his lawyers made a separate application that the warrant should be dropped on public interest grounds, leaving open the possibility that he could still walk out of the embassy in the near future.

Assange, 46, skipped bail to enter the embassy in 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden over allegations of sexual assault and rape, which he denies. Though Swedish prosecutors dropped the investigation against him, he faces arrest if he leaves the building in Knightsbridge, London, for breaching his former bail conditions in the UK.



In making the public interest case, Assange’s lawyer, Mark Summers QC, said the punishment Assange faces was not proportionate, and therefore not in the interests of justice. Arbuthnot said that she would rule on the point on 13 February.



Assange’s legal team said that the decision on Tuesday was far from final. Jennifer Robinson of Doughty Street Chambers said: “For more than seven years we have been fighting to end Julian Assange’s detention without charge. After today, that fight will continue until we can ensure his freedom.

“We will also continue to seek assurances that the UK does not have a US extradition warrant, and will let him leave the country freely and without interference.”

Hours after the decision Assange tweeted that a package containing a powdery substance and a threat had been sent to him at the embassy. The Metropolitan police confirmed it was investigating.

Julian Assange ⌛ (@JulianAssange) I can confirm that a package containing an unknown white powdery substance and a threat was addressed to my name. It was handed to UK diplomatic police. I understand they are performing toxicology and forensics. https://t.co/s0F2aCBSAS?

The judge’s initial decision means that Assange will continue to be confined to the embassy where he has lived for five years.

With a media throng outside, Lauri Love, the alleged hacker who was spared extradition to the US on Monday, left the embassy shortly before the decision was due to be handed down. He said he had been to visit his friend Assange to accept his congratulations. Love, who was pushing a large box on a trolley, joked that Assange was inside it.

Summers had argued to the court last month that since the Swedish case against Assange had been dropped, the warrant had “lost its purpose and its function”. He told Arbuthnot that because Swedish extradition proceedings against Assange had come to an end, so had the life of the arrest warrant.



But Arbuthnot rejected that argument on Tuesday, saying: “I’m not persuaded that the warrant should be withdrawn.”

She said Assange not surrendering to bail was an offence in its own right. In front of a packed public gallery, she said: “Once at court, the defendant would be given the opportunity to explain his failure to surrender and that is when Mr Assange would be able to place before the court his reasonable cause for failing to do so.”

Aaron Watkins, representing the Crown Prosecution Service, said Assange’s argument for having the warrant dropped was “strange and untenable”.

“Assange had been released on bail in proceedings; he was under a duty to surrender to the custody of the court and he failed to surrender at the appointed time for him to do so. Therefore a warrant stands,” Watkins said.

Assange remains concerned that he faces a secret US indictment on charges related to WikiLeaks’ disclosure of leaked classified US documents.

Ecuador recently granted him citizenship and asylum in an attempt to resolve the political impasse over his continued presence in the UK. It had tried unsuccessfully to persuade British officials to give Assange diplomatic status, which might have made it possible for him to leave Britain even if he was sought by US officials.

In applying for the warrant to be lifted on public interest grounds, Summers argued that Assange’s actions in seeking refuge at the embassy were reasonable in the light of the perceived threat of extradition to the US, adding: “I use reasonable grounds loosely ... justification is perhaps the better terminology.”



Referencing a UN description of his situation as “arbitrary, unreasonable, unnecessary, disproportionate”, he said Swedish prosecutors were free to interview him at the embassy. He added: “The last five and a half years that he has spent might be thought to be adequate if not severe punishment for the actions that he took.”

Tweeting after the hearing, Assange said: “We only lost the first of four points. I was never charged. My asylum was over US extradition and Sweden dropped its so-called ‘preliminary investigation’ a year ago. We are arguing four points ... If we win any point the warrant falls.”