Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Baltasar Garzón has gone round the bend and off the deep end:
... On a visit to Ecuador, Assange’s attorney, the Spanish judge Baltazar Garzón, said the British government would have no legal grounds to block Assange’s journey to Ecuador should he be granted asylum ...
HEADLINES AUGUST 07, 2012
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/8/7/headlines
Actually, the government of the UK will have long-recognized and perfectly clear legal grounds to detain Mr Assange, when he attempts to depart the embassy for other parts:
Mr Assange is still present on UK territory and subject to UK law, though he currently sitting in an embassy that UK authorities will respect for diplomatic reasons; like other European countries, the UK does not recognize "diplomatic asylum," but the Latin American countries that recognize "diplomatic asylum" also recognize that it is not a shield against ordinary criminal justice proceedings; Mr Assange has been the subject of an extensive judicial proceeding in the UK, in which he was afforded an opportunity to argue against extradition to Sweden, on whatever grounds he preferred; he argued against technical issues regarding the Swedish warrant and argued that sex with an unconscious woman would not be considered rape in most countries, but he declined to argue any political matters, and he also declined to argue anything regarding the possibility of subsequent further extradiction from Sweden (in fact, one of Assange's own witnesses testified that subsequent further extradiction from Sweden was flat-out impossible); the UK courts concluded that Swedish authority issued an entirely valid arrest warrant against him; Mr Assange eventually declined to pursue his appeal further and jumped bail; Mr Assange, now in violation of his bail conditions, has been served notice that he is to report to the UK authorities for extradition to Sweden
The sovereignty issue that arises here, of course, is the sovereignty of the UK, not the sovereignty of Ecuador, since entire current drama occurs on UK soil. If the UK authorities care much about the matter, they will request that Ecuador hand Assange over, since there is no developed body of evidence suggesting that this is anything other than an ordinary criminal matter (Mr Assange and his lawyers having declined to develop such a body of evidence when given the opportunity in the UK courts). But since the UK has here only acted to determine whether the arrest warrant were valid and (having determined it was valid) acted to fulfill its international obligations with respect to the warrant, the UK may not be in great haste to pursue the matter further, absent diplomatic overtures from Sweden. It may be that the UK and Sweden, and Ecuador as well, are all perfectly content to allow Mr Assange to repose indefinitely in the embassy, if he so chooses
HEADLINES AUGUST 07, 2012
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/8/7/headlines
Actually, the government of the UK will have long-recognized and perfectly clear legal grounds to detain Mr Assange, when he attempts to depart the embassy for other parts:
Mr Assange is still present on UK territory and subject to UK law, though he currently sitting in an embassy that UK authorities will respect for diplomatic reasons; like other European countries, the UK does not recognize "diplomatic asylum," but the Latin American countries that recognize "diplomatic asylum" also recognize that it is not a shield against ordinary criminal justice proceedings; Mr Assange has been the subject of an extensive judicial proceeding in the UK, in which he was afforded an opportunity to argue against extradition to Sweden, on whatever grounds he preferred; he argued against technical issues regarding the Swedish warrant and argued that sex with an unconscious woman would not be considered rape in most countries, but he declined to argue any political matters, and he also declined to argue anything regarding the possibility of subsequent further extradiction from Sweden (in fact, one of Assange's own witnesses testified that subsequent further extradiction from Sweden was flat-out impossible); the UK courts concluded that Swedish authority issued an entirely valid arrest warrant against him; Mr Assange eventually declined to pursue his appeal further and jumped bail; Mr Assange, now in violation of his bail conditions, has been served notice that he is to report to the UK authorities for extradition to Sweden
The sovereignty issue that arises here, of course, is the sovereignty of the UK, not the sovereignty of Ecuador, since entire current drama occurs on UK soil. If the UK authorities care much about the matter, they will request that Ecuador hand Assange over, since there is no developed body of evidence suggesting that this is anything other than an ordinary criminal matter (Mr Assange and his lawyers having declined to develop such a body of evidence when given the opportunity in the UK courts). But since the UK has here only acted to determine whether the arrest warrant were valid and (having determined it was valid) acted to fulfill its international obligations with respect to the warrant, the UK may not be in great haste to pursue the matter further, absent diplomatic overtures from Sweden. It may be that the UK and Sweden, and Ecuador as well, are all perfectly content to allow Mr Assange to repose indefinitely in the embassy, if he so chooses
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
