WikiLeaks

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Chris

We can but hope.

Agreed, i cannot stand the bloke personally

Originally Posted by Sirius

Agreed, i cannot stand the bloke personally

I'm no fan of him either - I am more concerned about the Diplomatic row being escalated over one man. It just simply isn't worth it.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Hugh

No, thanks - I've just eaten....

On a more serious note, how about sexual assault, which is one of the charges against Assange?

What about it? Should we ride roughshod over diplomatic protocol, or sever diplomatic ties with Ecuador altogether in order to extradite one person who is alleged to have committed sexual assault?

---------- Post added at 21:06 ---------- Previous post was at 21:04 ----------

Originally Posted by Mick

I'm no fan of him either - I am more concerned about the Diplomatic row being escalated over one man. It just simply isn't worth it.

Oh dear. If Osem agreeing with me isn't bad enough, I now find myself agreeing with Mick. Gremlins!!!

Well when he is extradited to Sweden and is then NOT handed over to the US we will see.

Originally Posted by danielf

What about it? Should we ride roughshod over diplomatic protocol, or sever diplomatic ties with Ecuador altogether in order to extradite one person who is alleged to have committed sexual assault?

most definitely not ,why the hell should we risk alienating the rest of the diplomatic world because of a matter that is between Assange and Sweden.We should not even contemplate the matter untill he is on British soil and then we can fulfill our legal obligation re the warrant untill then it's not our problem

Originally Posted by danielf

Oh dear. If Osem agreeing with me isn't bad enough, I now find myself agreeing with Mick. Gremlins!!!

It's only taken 9 years, 57 days and 2 hours and 14 minutes for you to agree on a single post I have ever made.

Originally Posted by danielf

What about it? Should we ride roughshod over diplomatic protocol, or sever diplomatic ties with Ecuador altogether in order to extradite one person who is alleged to have committed sexual assault?

Well first of all it's improper to grant Diplomatic Asylum anyway so Ecuador could be said to have rode roughshod over diplomatic protocol. It's also not proper to grant asylum for people on the grounds they face investigation for sexual assault.

However abiding by our own laws is not against diplomatic protocol no matter how many times people assert it to be so. Ecuador will be fully entitled to defend themselves in court if we took that route, which we haven't yet.

Finally if we do ignore Assange then we're breaking our legal obligation to Sweden. We we're in a catch-22 situation. I don't think we should let someone accused off sexual assault go without facing investigation because we're scared of a diplomatic row.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Mick

It's only taken 9 years, 57 days and 2 hours and 14 minutes for you to agree on a single post I have ever made.

Soz. In my defence, we all have our weak moments, and I haven't had a smoke in 4 days.

Originally Posted by martyh

most definitely not ,why the hell should we risk alienating the rest of the diplomatic world because of a matter that is between Assange and Sweden.We should not even contemplate the matter untill he is on British soil and then we can fulfill our legal obligation re the warrant untill then it's not our problem

We won't alienate the rest of the diplomatic world, Ecuador's behaviour isn't typical...All might end up doing is damaging relations with Ecuador and frankly who cares.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Damien

Well first of all it's improper to grant Diplomatic Asylum anyway so Ecuador could be said to have rode roughshod over diplomatic protocol. It's also not proper to grant asylum for people on the grounds they face investigation for sexual assault.

However abiding by our own laws is not against diplomatic protocol no matter how many times people assert it to be so. Ecuador will be fully entitled to defend themselves in court if we took that route, which we haven't yet.

I don't think it's right, but I'm not sure if it's improper. Second, it remains to be seen how the local law sits with international law, so there may well be an issue there.

Finally if we do ignore Assange then we're breaking our legal obligation to Sweden. We we're in a catch-22 situation. I don't think we should let someone accused off sexual assault go without facing investigation because we're scared of a diplomatic row.

I don't think anyone is saying we should let him go. He can stay where he is, and he will be arrested if he attempts to come out. I just don't think we should risk an international diplomatic row over attempting to smoke out someone who (and whose alleged offences) in the greater scheme of things doesn't matter one bit.

Originally Posted by Damien

Well first of all it's improper to grant Diplomatic Asylum anyway so Ecuador could be said to have rode roughshod over diplomatic protocol. It's also not proper to grant asylum for people on the grounds they face investigation for sexual assault.
.

That would be a issue for Britain and Ecuador to sort out

However abiding by our own laws is not against diplomatic protocol no matter how many times people assert it to be so. Ecuador will be fully entitled to defend themselves in court if we took that route, which we haven't yet.

Even if we did go in and arrest him i think there would be an army of lawyers running to the EU courts contesting the legality of the arrest and tieng it up for years

Finally if we do ignore Assange then we're breaking our legal obligation to Sweden. We we're in a catch-22 situation. I don't think we should let someone accused off sexual assault go without facing investigation because we're scared of a diplomatic row.

we would only be breaking our legal obligation if he was on British soil and since he isn't then we have no obligation legal or otherwise .

Of course we are forgetting that this all comes under the responsibility of william hague i believe so anything could happen

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Damien

We won't alienate the rest of the diplomatic world, Ecuador's behaviour isn't typical...All might end up doing is damaging relations with Ecuador and frankly who cares.

We will if we claim we had no choice as we have an obligation to extradite him, and therefore must use this loophole we have. Any other nation might find itself in a similar position.

Originally Posted by Damien

We won't alienate the rest of the diplomatic world, Ecuador's behaviour isn't typical...All might end up doing is damaging relations with Ecuador and frankly who cares.

It would be two South American Nations against us then though. We're becoming quite unpopular down there as it is. What with the Falkland Tensions with Argentina

Originally Posted by Mick

It would be two South American Nations against us then though. We're becoming quite unpopular down there as it is. What with the Falkland Tensions with Argentina

Meh. Not ideal but these are the cards we've been played. Ideally we can sort it without problems but we can't allow to just allow someone to escape justice without good reason.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by martyh

Even if we did go in and arrest him i think there would be an army of lawyers running to the EU courts contesting the legality of the arrest and tieng it up for years

If that happened, then as he has shown contempt for bail conditions, hopefully he will be locked up on remand for even longer than if he had just given himself up in the first place.