On Wednesday 27 November, Pirate Bay founder Gottfrid Svartholm will be removed from prison in Sweden and extradited to neighboring Denmark on hacking charges, despite already being cleared of similar charges in his home country. Speaking with TorrentFreak, Gottfrid's mother Kristina raises a number of serious concerns over her son's deportation to a country that has not formally indicted him.

In June 2013, authorities in Denmark requested the extradition of Gottfrid Svartholm following accusations that he was involved in hacking into a Danish company.

Their request would have to wait, however, pending the outcome of a parallel hacking case against The Pirate Bay founder in Sweden.

In the event Gottfrid was found guilty and handed two years in jail, but on appeal that was reduced to 12 months when it was decided that his involvement in a breach at the Nordea bank could not be proven.

This outcome was important. In the Nordea case the court found that although Gottfrid’s computer had been used in the hack, it was possible it had been remotely controlled. This doubt led to an acquittal and the sparking of new hope as the case in Denmark involved the same computer during the same time period in a similar case.

With this in mind, last month Gottrid filed a last-ditch appeal at the Supreme Court in Sweden. It was a failed exercise and as a result Gottfrid faces extradition to Denmark where he is accused of hacking into the mainframe computers of IT company CSC.

Speaking with TorrentFreak, Gottfrid’s mother Kristina says that while the similarities in the cases are obvious, the Danish police appear to have other things on their minds.

“The Danish police have shown a significantly greater interest in what a person mentioned by name and called ‘Swedish police’ in the documents has had to say about the computer and its remote control possibilities,” Kristina says. “According to his person, Gottfrid’s computer could not have been remotely controlled.”

This, of course, is completely the opposite of the conclusion arrived at by the Court of Appeal.

Furthermore, Kristina says that the person from the Swedish Security Police told Danish authorities that Gottfrid used the nickname “My Evil Twin”, yet that name has never appeared in the Swedish investigation or in another situation related to him.

“This ‘nick’ is given, however, such a distinction in the investigation that it is even to be found in a separate heading, along with the two names that are familiar from the Swedish investigation, ‘Anakata’ and ‘tLt’. The basis for this? Well, the name was found in a file in the computer. And, according to the person from Säpo, the computer could not have been used by someone else. And therefore that nickname must be Gottfrid’s,” Kristina explains.

Notably, the Säpo employee was also the person who originally tipped off Danish police about the intrusion made against CSC. That tipoff led to the issuing of an arrest warrant for Gottfrid on the basis that he had sabotaged and caused “the extensive disruption of information systems,” but up until this point they had no idea that there was anything wrong.

But even though the Danish authorities still believe they have a strong case that warrants extradition, it is interesting that up until now no indictment has appeared.

“The documentation that the Danish police have presented to Gottfrid is, in his own words, extremely thin. Time has passed and no indictment has yet been presented. But the demand for extradition remains,” Kristina explains.

There are other problems too. In the documents seen by Kristina the Danish police’s case against Gottfrid references the ‘guilty’ judgment handed down by the District Court earlier in the year but of course that was later repealed by the Court of Appeal. There is no mention of the acquittal.

“[The police] obviously do not want to let the Danish court take note of this assessment of the remote control of the computer. If they did the suspicions against Gottfrid would fall,” Kristina explains.

In correspondence with the Danish prosecutor in September, Kristina was informed that the authorities do not intend to take note of the Court of Appeal ruling, despite any similarities in the cases. As a result Gottfrid will be sent to Denmark next week where he will likely be imprisoned for many months before he faces trial. If he had remained in Sweden he would have been free by the end of the year, a point not lost on his mother.

“Is this all about keeping Gottfrid locked up as long as possible, regardless of cost, human and financial?” she questions. “Why, in that case? To punish him? In order to set an example?”

If convicted in Denmark, Gottfrid faces up to six years in jail.