The Latest New

By Erik Larson

(Updates with Parliament extradition vote in sixth paragraph.)

Dec. 5 (Bloomberg) -- WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will be able to ask the U.K. Supreme Court to block his extradition to Sweden after an appeals judge said the clarification of a legal issue in the case would benefit the public.

Assange’s lawyers successfully argued British citizens would benefit from a final ruling on whether prosecutors, as opposed to judges, have authority to issue European arrest warrants. Assange argues his warrant is invalid because the Swedish prosecutor who issued it isn’t a “judicial authority,” as required under the law for Europe’s shared warrant system.

While the appeals court agreed the question is important, it denied Assange permission to automatically challenge its Nov. 2 ruling that the 40-year-old Australian return to Sweden to face allegations of rape. As a result, Britain’s top court will have to decide for itself whether to take the case.

“The struggle for justice, for myself and others, continues,” Assange said outside the court, where supporters held signs calling for his freedom. The court “determined that an issue that arises from my own case is a matter of general public importance.”

Assange, arrested in London a year ago, is accused of failing to use a condom in one incident and of having sex with a woman who was sleeping in another. The alleged misconduct was revealed as WikiLeaks, an anti-secrecy website, was being condemned by U.S. authorities for posting thousands of classified military and diplomatic communications, prompting Assange to argue the case was politically motivated.

Commons Vote

The ruling comes as the U.K. House of Commons prepares for a non-binding vote on whether to amend Britain’s extradition laws to bolster human-rights protections for British citizens wanted abroad. The vote will address perceived problems with the European arrest warrant and a separate extradition treaty between the U.S. and U.K.

“The issue is ripe for consideration by the Supreme Court,” Assange’s lawyer, Mark Summers, said at the hearing. “This warrant has not been issued by a court or a judge.”

A second argument by Summers -- that the warrant is invalid because Assange hasn’t yet been charged in Sweden -- isn’t an issue of general public importance, the appeals court ruled, narrowing what the Supreme Court may consider.

The alleged crimes took place in August 2010 in Stockholm and Enkoeping, Sweden, where Assange was lecturing to supporters about publishing the U.S. documents. Assange was invited to stay with the women in their apartments and claims the sex was consensual.

State of Sleep

In the Court of Appeal ruling last month, judges John Smith and Duncan Ouseley said it’s “difficult to see how a person could reasonably have believed in consent if the complaint alleges a state of sleep or half-sleep.”

Australian Senator Scott Ludlam, a member of the Greens party, said today Australia should take “a much more active role” to ensure Assange isn’t sent from Sweden to the U.S.

“We are concerned that Mr. Assange, if extradited to Sweden, could subsequently be extradited to the United States to face trumped-up charges arising from the work of the WikiLeaks website,” Ludlam said in a statement.

WikiLeaks temporarily suspended operations in October to raise money during what it called a U.S. “financial blockade.” Visa Europe Ltd., MasterCard Inc., American Express Co. and EBay Inc.’s PayPal halted payments to the site, Assange said.

Assange, who was born in Townsville, Australia, and began as a computer hacker, has been under police surveillance at a friend’s home in Suffolk, England, since shortly after being detained a year ago this week.

Editors: Christopher Scinta, Heather Smith