Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lordcooper]

He can stay t my place if he wants.  The UK government would never think of looking at Wales; for Assange of any other reason.

[Osmosis Jones]

Which is why the preferred UK strategy might be to take Ecuador to court (using the law cited in their 'threat' letter), demonstrating definitively than sheltering Assange is not legal under international law, then shutting down the embassy. It would be much more expensive for both sides, incredibly long winded and no-one is entirely sure how it works (even what court has jurisdiction is a slightly fuzzy question).

Honestly there is no good path for anyone from here. It's an ugly diplomatic situation that can't really end well unless Assange hands himself over.

I thought that law only applied to consuls though, and not embassies? Ergo, there is no real way of taking back embassy land shy of force?

[palsch]

I thought that law only applied to consuls though, and not embassies? Ergo, there is no real way of taking back embassy land shy of force?

The Carl Gardener piece I linked (here again) looks at the legal options. The main path is the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, passed in response to the murder of Yvonne Fletcher. She was shot from inside the Libyan embassy, so her shooter could never be found or detained. This law was designed to remove diplomatic status in similar cases.

Interestingly, this contemporary report suggests it simply brings British law in line with other nations. One specific function is retaliation against a nation that makes a similar move against the UK. It also mentions the USA as one nation with similar provisions under law.

I have heard of at least one case where the law was put into practice (I believe to remove squatters) but need to find the reference.

Very Late Edit: Found the reference.

Or if he's somehow spirited out of the country.

Assange somehow getting past the police, evading capture and escaping British airspace? That's going to be ugly. And likely completely impossible.

I've seen someone suggest (hilariously) he could use the chunnel to get out without needing a plane, except that you can't exactly just drive out through the tunnel and that would keep him within Europe, where the European arrest warrant still has force and he has no diplomatic status.


EDIT: Another good piece on the legal side from a former ambassador.

[Osmosis Jones]

-snop-

Hmmm cheers. That link you posted in the edit was a particularly good read. Long story short, Assange is screwed. I wonder if the whole states extradition was ever going to happen, and if so, if they would still consider it now after all the press?

I've seen someone suggest (hilariously) he could use the chunnel to get out without needing a plane, except that you can't exactly just drive out through the tunnel and that would keep him within Europe, where the European arrest warrant still has force and he has no diplomatic status.

...cue Assange in a diplomatic car embassy hopping across Europe. I think I've got a copy of yakkity sax floating around here somewhere...

[palsch]

Hmmm cheers. That link you posted in the edit was a particularly good read. Long story short, Assange is screwed. I wonder if the whole states extradition was ever going to happen, and if so, if they would still consider it now after all the press?

Let me wear my speculative conspiracy theorist hat for a minute?

Bradley Manning is charged with a number of crimes. The one that gets all the attention is 'aiding the enemy', which I think is the weakest case but carries the strongest penalty. One crime that certainly seems to fit his actions is a bit more important. It's the charge under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (there are actually two charges covering more than 70 documents under this act). This law was amended (by the Patriot Act for
 bonus conspiracy points) to be included under RICO.

RICO is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. It's designed to take down organised crime. Specifically it makes everyone within an organisation guilty of certain crimes if committed by one member of that organisation, within some parameters. If a mob boss orders a hit he is liable for the murder under RICO.

In this case, if Manning is found guilty of this particular crime, if he is found to have been acting as a part of Wikileaks as an organisation, if his crime were encouraged by that organisation or Assange personally, then it may be possible to bring RICO charges against Assange. That could carry some serious jail time with a maximum of a decade per charge.

This is the absolute only path I can see that would result in Assange being extradited to the US. And in these conditions he would be, at least from the UK. Under the UK/US extradition treaty simply bringing such charges in the US would meet the requirements for extradition. He wouldn't be at risk of capital punishment (and even if he were a guarantee could be given that it wouldn't be sought). Sweden might offer greater protection, given that the UK/US treaty favours the US strongly and I'm not aware of a similar deal between Sweden and the US, but I'd still expect such charges to be recognised and valid enough to make the extradition.

It's also worth noting that Assange is staying in the European legal system for a while now. He has to be extradited to Sweden to face the sex crime allegations, then back to the UK to face the consequences of skipping bail. Had he simply faced the charges in the first place he may well have beaten them or served his sentence and been free to go, fleeing out of the US's reach. Now there is a better chance that Manning will be tried and convicted before Assange is at liberty again, leaving the US with the option to extradite him directly from an English prison.

Guess I'm not that good a conspiracy theorist.


EDIT: Another legal link for those interested - Charon QC has just put up an extended podcast with Carl Gardner along with a lengthy link dump regarding various myths and questions surrounding the case. I'm just about to listen in, but the text and some links are worth checking even if you don't have the 43 minutes for the cast. And if you have more time the links include a panel discussion from the time of the Supreme Court judgement, found here (also touches on other matters that might not be of interest outside the UK but I do remember it being a good discussion), and a 2010 interview with Assanges lawyer, recently bumped here.

EDIT2: Looking at CharonQC's twitter feed there are some more significant details, mostly from this exchange with Ben McCombe. He first cites the High Court ruling (specifically paragraph 142:8-10 of this document[.pdf]) to explain the situation with the Swedish allegations. This includes the nature of questioning they want to take place, why it can't take place in England (or the embassy).

He then links this article about an ex-CIA officer who the US wanted on charges of espionage after his defection to Russia. He was released by Sweden rather than extradited. The main reason for this seems to be that espionage is not a crime you can be extradited for (as it is a political crime) and they couldn't find any other charges for him. Given a lot of the fears regarding American involve hypothetical espionage or similarly political charges I think this story is significant.

[SalmonGod]

Millions of Americans now fall within government's digital dragnet

An ArsTechnica article on the current scope of communications surveillance in the U.S.

[GalenEvil]

Is that at all related to the "virus" scare that resulted in the media telling people to go to [insert alphabet agencies acronym here]'s website to get checked out, or else possibly have your internet connection taken away?

Just about to read the article but didn't want to forget what I wanted to post in the meantime.

[SalmonGod]

A minor update on the situation with Julian Assange.

It seems police staking out the embassy are under orders to arrest him even if he's in a diplomatic bag or vehicle?

[Sheb]

Apparently the police has a right to stop any vehicle, so it could stop any vehicle carrying Assange.

[palsch]

A minor update on the situation with Julian Assange.

It seems police staking out the embassy are under orders to arrest him even if he's in a diplomatic bag or vehicle?

Diplomatic bags can only be used for certain legal purposes. A good example is, in the UK at least, you can't use them to transport illegal firearms. You certainly can't use them to smuggle wanted criminals. While you can't randomly search such bags to check for such contraband, if you have a reason to believe they are being abused (such as being a man sized bag and screaming when you prod it with a pitchfork) you can search it.

As for a vehicle, you can't search it or enter it, but you can stop it. I'd guess they let the car get just far enough he couldn't get back to the embassy then surround, stop and isolate it. Then it's just waiting till Assange gives up camping in a car rather than an office floor. Alternatively they just arrests him on the way to the car. Given the embassy is on the second floor, getting him in would be tricky.

[Sheb]

He only need to jump into an open-roofed van.

[Leafsnail]

Can segways be declared diplomatic vehicles?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

He should dig a tunnel to the coastline and escape like that.

[Osmosis Jones]

He only need to jump into an open-roofed van.

Which can then be legally stopped because the police will have seen it happen, and know that something not covered by diplomatic privilege is being transported.


No, what they need to do is find a government official that looks sort of like Assange and fly him into the UK. Have a really skilled makeup artist make Assange look like the Ecuadorian, and disguise the Ecuadorian to look like Assange. Have not-Assange appear a few times up at the window (not enough for anyone to get a close look, mind you) while have Assange act the role of a minor flunky. Then, take Assange out of the country via the Chunnel and out of the EU in another country that doesn't care as much about Assange (so they're less likely to recognise him through the makeup).

Then, reveal his presence once he's safely landed in Ecuador.

[palsch]

He should dig a tunnel to the coastline and escape like that.

There is, I believe, another flat under his. He'd need a chute through that. You can see the lower floor in this photo. The balcony with the flag is where he did his Evita impersonation. I can't remember right now if the other embassy (Colombian) in the building is above or below his, but if it's below he'd need permission from yet another nation to escape that way. I think it is below, given most of the upper flats are private residences.


If we are talking long shots, I saw a proposal to have him declared an UN Envoy of some sort, which would allow him immunity so long as he was travelling to a UN headquarters. Unfortunately the UK could veto, but there may be a grace period where he has provisional immunity. During which time he could travel to New York (heh), Vienna (definitely subject to the European Arrest Warrant), Geneva or Nairobi. I'm guessing one of the last two. Except that Switzerland helped shut down Wikileaks accounts. So Kenya it is.

Oh, so long as he could be cleared for that provisional status. Let's just hope he meets the criteria and hasn't pissed off any voting nations recently.