Banner

By Alex Robertson
 
Does it really require a statement from the UK Foreign Secretary and a threat to rescind the diplomatic immunity granted to the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to secure the extradition to Sweden of a man not even charged of an offence in that country?
 
Does it not strike anyone else as a mite over the top?  Even a tad suspicious?  After all the scandal of UK complicity in extraordinary rendition by the US, what exactly is the UK government afraid of?

These questions all popped into my head when I read the news about the latest bizarre twist in the Assange story.  To be sure, Wikileaks must be an infernal nuisance to governments, who have a singular aversion to being caught out in naughty business.

But we the people may have a different view.  Some of us are mighty grateful to them for revealing what governments have been up to.  And to be fair, nobody is asking Mr Hague to issue a statement applauding Mr Assange’s being granted asylum by a foreign state.  But he could have stayed silent and let diplomatic immunity alone.  Instead he has started a process that might well blow up in his face.  Except it will not be his face, it will be ours.  And Ecuador’s President has obliged already.

What has this to do with Scotland and Scots?

It is perhaps asking a bit much of the Scottish government to try to intervene, although whether they would be right to endorse the Westminster view is more interesting and might be worth hearing, but I sense there is sufficient concern, to put it mildly, among Scots that the UK government is once again adopting the role of Washington’s poodle in pursuing the line they are.

Diplomatic immunity works both ways, and I can imagine with no difficulty at all what the Westminster reaction would be if the boot were on the other foot.  Once breeched, it will be next to impossible, and take a great deal of time and effort to remove or mitigate the bad effects any breech by the UK would bring down on our heads.

The one thing that must not be allowed to happen is that the work of Wikileaks is inhibited or impaired.  The revelations they have made, the uncovering of murky deeds by governments, our own included have been genuinely shocking.  We must not allow those who govern us to once more drag a cloak over what they get up to.

As a Scot, brought up and tutored to be open and honest, I am unwilling to see the State change the rules whenever it suits them.  If there is one thing an independent Scotland must enshrine in our constitution, it is protection for those who disclose what dirty business is got up to in our name, the whistleblowers.

Openness and transparency must mean more than just words uttered in a pious voice with an expression of saintly innocence.  Perhaps the best thing we Scots can do right now is to donate supporting funds to Wikileaks, and urge our parliamentarians to have a debate on Wikileaks and a motion to compel any Scottish government to conducts its business in an ethical way and safeguard whistleblowers.

And then to start work right now on drafting a Constitution for an independent Scotland which will require Scotland to behave in an exemplary manner when it comes to the conduct of its affairs.

Comments  

 
# Silverytay 2012-08-19 11:39
What an excellent article .
I for one want to know what the government gets upto in my name .
Never mind Iraq , Libya or Afghanistan which we now all know about .
What about the strange cases off Hilda Murrell , Ian McRae and Dr Kelly .
Were these people murdered by the British State ?
If these people were murdered as many people suspect then we definitely need the likes of wikileaks and other whistleblowers to be afforded some form of protection for informing us what is going on in our name .
 
 
# Glenbuchat 2012-08-19 12:16
Nearly 600 words and not one mention of the serious allegations of sexual crimes which Julian Assange stands accused of. Not one mention of the fact that Mr Assange has exhausted every avenue of legal process to stop the UK carrying out its duty to extradite him under the terms of international treaty obligations. No hint that Mr Assange has broken the trust of those who stood bail for him or appears to think that accountability applies to others but not to him.

In almost all other instances, those of a nationalist bent hold up Sweden and the other Scandinavian countries as paragons of al that we should strive towards. Is it seriously being suggested that we do not recognise the right of Sweden to properly investigate serious criminal allegations against Mr Assange?

I earnestly hope that, in the unlikely event that Scotland becomes an independent nation, we will not become some sort of refuge from justice for those who stand accused of the most vile of crimes.

[Online Editor - You are free to draft, as Mr Robertson has done, a 600 word article giving your own views.

Newsnet Scotland provides online forms specifically designed to allow site visitors to submit their own articles.]
 
 
# dodgardiner 2012-08-19 13:04
if you want to learn/ debate something on the Assange case there is a fact sheet on bellacaledonia, you may wish to respond to it with your own knowledge of the case.
 
 
# Angry_Weegie 2012-08-19 13:36
Given he has been accused, but not charged, with an offence, why did the Swedish prosecutors not take the option of interviewing Mr Assange in the UK to help decide whether there was sufficient evidence to request extradition.
 
 
# doctor_zaius 2012-08-19 13:46
http

Very interesting analysis I would say.
 
 
# Briggs 2012-08-19 13:46
Actions have consequences, but some folk seem to think Julian Assange should be an exception to this.

He is anything but a hero in my eyes at least. He is evading a trial for a criminal offence and should be extradited to Sweden.

Just once I would like to see a photograph without the arrogant wee smile on his chops.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-08-19 14:38
He hasn't even been charged with a criminal offence. It might be better to wait until he's convicted of one before deciding what actions he may or may not have taken, or you risk making the opposing argument.
 
 
# RJBH 2012-08-19 12:27
Great article Alex Robertson... Pity no one seems interested... It reflects much of what I think myself.

For those who believe it is not a subject for the Scottish Government... The SG seems to have taken a fence sitting position.. or indeed is supporting the UK government on the threat to attack the Ecuadorian Embassy.

This particular subject will not go away.. Assange may well remain in the Ecuador Embassy for many more weeks or even months...... In the meantime the SG by its silence.. supports UKs Threat to attack Ecaudor.... Shameful.
 
 
# elle34 2012-08-19 12:50
Glenbuchat Sweden have been offered the opportunity to interview Julian Assange via skype or to send reps over to do so. (They managed to do this for someone accused of murder.) It is obvious America have their hand in this as anyone else who has had no official charges made against them seeking asylum would not generate a reaction such as Hagues. And because america has their hand in it it must therefore be about Mr Assanges whistleblowing activities and not his sexual ones.
 
 
# Breeks 2012-08-19 13:17
The first arrest warrant for sexual assault was cancelled by a state prosecuter and the alleged offence downgraded to a lesser offence. That was subsequently overturned, when the Swedish Director of Prosecution maintained the offence could be interpreted as rape and the arrest warrant re-issued. To elaborate, I have read the alleged rape was an act of consensual sex but where Assange refused to wear protection. That may be a crime, the Swedish prosecutor believes that might constitute rape, but there are many other crimes much more deserving of the word 'vile'.

One reason Ecuadore gave for granting asylum to Assange was that they could not get adequate assurances that Assange would not be extradited to the USA if he allowed himself to be extradited to Sweden.

Now it's a very murkey world, and Assange has gone out of his way to make powerful enemies, but I get the impression Assange would contest the charges against him in Sweden, but he is much more worried about being extradited to the USA if he does so.

There are voices in the USA which have already called for Assange to be assassinated, or at least stand trial in the US as a terrorist, where he could face the death penalty.

It is indeed the 'strange' case of Julian Assange.

I won't go so far as to say he's made his bed, so he must lie in it, but he must surely have realised the consequences of leaking so much sensitive information was going to make him powerful enemies with very long memories. Assange has built a career for himself hacking into places he wasn't allowed, and now asks we look towards him for moral leadership. Personally, I think he's a bit of a lightweight who is way out of his depth.
 
 
# RJBH 2012-08-19 16:07
yup... much in your last paragraph I agree with..."Way out of his depth". yes... who wouldnt be exposing the US and others for what they are...I have no doubt the US will reel him in.. and he will have to pay the price of Wikileaks....

The threat by the UK government to attack the Ecuadonian Embassy shows that the Cameron government is a willing participant to Obamas will... the real question here... Is Alex Salmond and the Scottish government of the same opinion? ... or will they reject Camerons stance.
 
 
# freeussoon 2012-08-19 19:21
Breeks

Julian Assange has Not hacked. He in fact is only the publisher. Why is he targeted? There are others who have worked on Wikileaks, but despite some of them being "spoken to", only Mr Assange is threatened.
So many questions, so few answers.....

p.s. You are mistaken about there being a first arrest warrant.
 
 
# Glenbuchat 2012-08-19 19:47
You entirely miss the point that Mr Assange, and Mr Assange alone, stands accused of sexual molestation and rape. His appeal against extradition, under the terms of binding international treaty, has gone all the way to the Supreme Court.

If he is innocent of these charges he has nothing to fear from Swedish justice or its human rights record which, by the way, is somewhat more robust than that of Ecuador.
 
 
# flyingscotsman 2012-08-19 22:57
I think you will find he is accused of not using protection despite the woman consenting to sex while believing he had protection. Not rape. And I would think that this would just be nigh impossible to prove. This is most likely why the case was initially dropped almost immediately. Why it was reopened months later is a mystery...something is amiss for sure.

As for human rights, I have read stories about Sweden in recent days looking at their juducual system. These include one where taking pictures of childrens genitals not being illegal and another where transgenders are being required to be sterilised before their operations. Not to mention Sweden taking part in the war in Afghanistan. While Ecuador has not taken part in any war in recent times. It all depends on what you observe or ignore.
 
 
# Glenbuchat 2012-08-20 13:45
You may wish to check the Supreme Court records: "The appellant, Mr Assange, is the subject of a request for extradition by the Swedish Prosecuting
Authority for the purposes of an investigation into alleged offences of sexual molestation and rape."
 
 
# pa_broon74 2012-08-20 16:30
Its not even as clear as him not wearing a condom, a torn condom was entered (if you'll excuse the term) as 'evidence' the 'victim' claimed Assange damaged it deliberately.

I am aware that the internet abound with a great many niche sexual proclivities but this really does stretch the imagination.

Also, the European Arrest Warrant system does not stand up to scrutiny, you may remember the case of Graham Mitchell who was very nearly returned to Portugal after he 'murdered' a german tourist 20 years ago. Said tourist meanwhile was playing wheelchair basket ball back home in Germany. He was assaulted but the case against Mitchell was thrown out because no one could identify either the accused or the victim.

EAW are very often not worth the paper they're written on.
 
 
# Breeks 2012-08-19 19:46
Dig a little deeper Freeussoon. In 1995 he pleaded guilty to charges of hacking, even into the Pentagon computers I think...

I'm happy to be corrected about the charges, but simply commenting from what I had read at the time.
 
 
# tartanpigsy 2012-08-19 20:08
Found this whilst having a wee look at the Wikileaks site, it just goes to show that the whole British establishment and their 'liberal' press are a danger not just to ourselves as promoters of Scottish Independence, but to anything that doesnt suit the State (UK) agenda.

i.e. Press freedom is only tolerated as a smokescreen for its true purpose as a controlling instrument for society.

wikileaks.org/.../

Points 13-15 on the document available on Bellacaledonia linked above are also interesting regarding our sometimes idealistic perceptions of all Scandinavian Countries as some sort of Social Democratic Panacea,

Sweden according to some is not far off a Police State, whilst its closest neighbour Denmark has a much more ingrained liberalism within its society.
 
 
# xyz 2012-08-19 21:11
It is often said rightly IMO that the UK British Westminster government is the eager lapdog of the US government.

... but why then is Mr Assange apparently in more danger of being extradited from Sweden to USA than he is from this disunited kingdom?

--------------------------------------------
Regarding the case in Sweden:
markcrispinmiller.com/.../...
Eight BIG PROBLEMS with the “case” against Assange (MUST-READ by Naomi Wolf)
 
 
# nemo 2012-08-20 11:25
I think if the U.K were to extradite Assange to the U.S. for Wikileaks there would be a justifiable backlash against a government being seen to help punish 'free speech'. But extraditing a sex offender to Sweden - much less of a problem. It just all looks really suspect. The charges against him require investigation but that has to be within a binding agreement where he is returned to the U.K. if found innocent.
 
 
# alang 2012-08-20 13:51
Bella posted this which sums it up for me bellacaledonia.org.uk/.../...

These are politically motivated "assertions" against Mr Assange. If the Swedish need to interview him, fly over to London and I'm sure he'll accept them to interview him in the Embassy. Sorry Asange gets the benefit of doubt from me. Both Bush(s), Blair and all their crowd need putting in the dock as they are the criminals who perpetrated actual crimes agains various peoples on this earth. As for this so called democratic Government, they are a disgrace !
What about the criminal Bankers who have wrecked hundreds of thousands of lives, I don't see any of them in the dock either!
The MSM is controlled by the shady people with money so they spout what the money men want and that is to stop free speech everywhere!
 
 
# Caadfael 2012-08-20 16:27
The Scottish Govt should distance itself from the Mekon .. sharpish!
CIA honeytrap!
End of!
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Banner
Banner

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Latest Comments