So this Assange business. As far as I can make out, this UN panel has no legal weight, has not shown
its working in deciding he's been 'arbitrarily detained' and is basically a faceless kangaroo court. Also, since it is specifically set up to be a working group on arbitrary detentions, guess what? It tends to decide if asked that people are being arbitrarily detained. Big shock there.
The facts are these:
1/ Assange has not been detained. Instead he has chosen to detain himself in the Ecuadorian embassy in order to evade lawful arrest and extradition proceedings.
2/ The extradition order to which he is subject is entirely lawful under the terms of the European Arrest Warrant and involves extradition to a liberal, democratic country with an excellent human rights record.
As far as I can see, there is absolutely no justification whatsoever for this finding. It's simply an overtly political attempt to subvert British and European rule of law.
No one's going to takie any notice of them though, surely?
Of course not. It's just a publicity stunt to try and embarrass Britain into letting him wander off.
The demand for compensation is particularly f**king cheeky.
If he walks out and we don't nick the f**ker, I will be awfully distressed.
I don't think we have a choice. To fail to do so would be a breach of our treaty obligations.
The only way that might happen is if the Swedes drop the final charge... :-(
Unleash the scalphunters.
Or let the inquisitors sweat him at Sarratt for a while first. Then let Fawn loose on what's left of him.
I had to wait in for the Tesco man the other day, I was 'arbitrarily detained'
Blimey - when you and the Guardian are in complete agreement something must be wrong
“[Assange] is not being detained arbitrarily. Three-and-a-half years ago, he sought refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in order to avoid extradition to Sweden to face allegations of sex offences. He had fought extradition through every court, and at each his case was rejected. “Arbitrary” detention means that due legal process has not been observed. It has. This is a publicity stunt
You've made me doubt myself now, la.
It's a tricky one for the Guardian.
Rich White Man reinforcing patriarchal downpressing by *****ular intrusion = hang him. On the other hand, Rich White Man who hates the West and is prepared to sell it out to its enemies = Saint.
I expect they just tossed a coin.
