Has anyone a clue how anyone in the Met thinks they can barge in to the Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Assange as they seem to have threatened to do? Surely the embassy is sovereign territory of Ecuador and entering it without permission would be an incursion upon Ecuador itself?
Assange to go!
- Thread starter Hitman_Leon
- Start date
Apparently so.
But they may just ignore that.
After seeing what has happened with DotCom I really would not be surprised if this is just a plot to get him in America and facing death row.
great a country with a GDP equivalent to tesco's, not sure that's much of an issue.
Last edited:
They probably don't, the only people saying they do is Ecuador. It seems incredibly unlikely that the Met would risk a diplomatic incident over this.
Also, as with anything else in international politics, the fact that it is sovereign territory only really matters if Ecuador can do anything about it.
That's exactly what Ecuador has said:
"If the measure announced in the British official communication is enacted, it will be interpreted by Ecuador as an unacceptable, unfriendly and hostile act and as an attempt against our sovereignty. It would force us to respond," he said.
Of course they could go in and get him if they really wanted. The fallout would probably be that Ecuador would close their UK embassy and kick the British one out of Ecuador. I don't see much else happening, while it would be a breach of their 'soil', it wouldn't be worth going to war over. I'm sure it will be resolved before it comes to that anyway.
Unless they're suicidal armed guards it's not really an issue.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 2,908
- Location
- Merseyside. UK
If they do end up carrying out this threat to storm in to the Ecuadorian embassy and arrest Assange this is only more proof that the UK is nothing but the lap dog of America imo.
Damn the 51 state of Sweden!
Associate
- Joined
- 9 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,377
Revoking diplomatic immunity would be a political decision, perhaps in the same way Jack Straw claimed that Pinochet was too ill to be extradited back in 2000. I wouldn't be surprised to hear the US has been in contact with the British government and asked them to pull out all the stops.
they can just close it and kick them out as we've done in the past and many countries have done to ours in the past.
It seems that we have the legal ability to withdraw their consular status if we so wish. Then the police can just go in and arrest him. But what has probably happened is that the UK have mentioned this as a possible option to Ecuador to put pressure on them to hand him over rather than there being a van of Met officers waiting for the order to go in and get him.
If he is granted asylum then I don't think they can do much.
They could but even given its a tin pot little place and all that its a slightly extreme reaction to having him inside the consulate. We usually break relations with people who shoot people or do pretty atrocious things, not just keeping a guy on the loose from bail for deport in their embassy.
I'd have thought it was easier to wait for him to leave and get out of the embassy car at the airport and nab him on the plane.
Which is why we use the legislation to make it no longer the sovereign territory of another nation. I suppose Ecuador could still decide to declare war over their consular status being revoked but it seems unlikely as it wouldn't really gain them all that much.
It's a horrible abuse of the asylum principles, though we are hardly a sterling upholder (I worked in IND, asylum is not really something we ought to be that proud of nor indeed many people claiming it) but the principle of political asylum was not founded to protect someone from being deported to a country with a legal system that is pretty enviable.
We could argue they have breached their duty to safeguard dignity of mission and prevent disturbing the peace of the mission in their acceptance. I am not even sure they are classed as sovereign territory I think that is a common misconception.