[governance] Julian Assange extradition: Ecuador 'willing to co-operate' with Britain

[Riaz K Tayob]

Thanks this is interesting, but misses my point that I made in response 
to Adam's post. So I take the New Statesman and the Guardian's legal 
eagle (J Rozenberg, 10 Apr 2012) with a pinch of salt at best. I simply 
cannot fathom the conflation of the rape allegations with whistleblower 
protection and risk of torture (even those who are guilty can claim 
asylum). But we can agree to disagree. I however do prefer classical 
liberal views.

None of these New Statesman's claims is important as far as a claim for 
asylum based on a well founded fear of persecution. Solitary confinement 
(as practised by the US in Super Max prisons and in particular for those 
who "challenge" the security establishment), and other cruel, inhumane 
of degrading treatment (like no clothes for Manning etc, see further 
James Ball (UK Guardian 29 Nov 2011)) are sufficient to sustain a claim 
for asylum. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in one the MOST 
dastardly of decisions (in process and substance, with undermining of 
even the 'separation of powers' doctrine - independence of the judiciary 
- undermined as intimated publicly by a senior legal British official) 
ruled favourably in extradition involving muslims Babar Ahmad, Syed 
Talha Ahsan and Adel Bary et al (I do not condone nor support any of the 
actions of these individuals, but this is a matter of precedent and 
sanctity of the law). Not even the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture was 
able to lead evidence on the treatment to be expected if extradition was 
granted. The court also relied upon the long democratic tradition of the 
US (hearing only flowery governmental representations) implying US 
Exceptionalism. What this means is the almost ANY European can be 
extradited to the US now without regard for the treatment he may 
receive. And what is clear is whether state action is valid in these 
circumstances, as against a grundnorm. The soldiers and mercenaries 
implicated (by Wikileaks) in the most heinous crimes as revealed by 
Wikileaks tend to get away with the 'few bad apples' justification with 
token judgements against them in the rare instances where action was 
taken. Sweden and Britain are implicated in extraordinary renditions, 
that Human Rights Watch rep said was ok. So, for me, some perspective is 
in order.

Perhaps the dialogue in “A Man for Seasons” (by Robert Bolt) on the 
'spurious' conviction of Sir Thomas More  with his accuser is relevant:

*William Roper:* So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

*Sir Thomas More:* Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the 
law to get after the Devil?

*William Roper:* Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!


*Sir Thomas More:* Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil 
turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being 
flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, 
Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man 
to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that 
would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own 
safety's sake!

But, we can agree to disagree. This is a fork in the road, where 
judgements and motives differ...

On 2012/08/22 12:35 PM, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <kFngzIdDI7MQFAfr at internetpolicyagency.com>, at 17:06:27 on
> Tue, 21 Aug 2012, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> writes
>>> And how do you read the former Stockholm Chief District prosecutor
>>> Sven-Erik Alhem views,  who testified that the decision to extradite
>>> Assange is ?unreasonable and unprofessional, as well as unfair and
>>> disproportionate.?? As he could be questioned in the UK
>> A different view from a different lawyer.
> A good article here, which explains the "where he can be interviewed"
> thing, plus the ongoing "zombie facts" issue which afflicts this case:
>
> <http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-green/2012/08/legal-
> myths-about-assange-extradition>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120822/23a76263/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t