4 ms·

> simply checking that rules have been followed One of the rules is one should not be extradited for political reasons, and that is what is obviously happening

by acqq 6y ago

> simply checking that rules have been followed One of the rules is one should not be extradited for political reasons, and that is what is obviously happening here and what is argued on the court by the defense. But as the US representative can decide what is included as the evidence and the judge accepts that or even directly helps cherrypicking(!), there's where the tragedy starts. Moreover, a political process against somebody whom the US likes to support would be a top title in all media. Because that's what we have learned, it matters: one should not be punished for that. That idea was even present in the legal agreements, including these about extradition. It is that "simple."

mlthoughts2018 6y ago
The parent comment can only be described as trolling. Your response is valiant but probably best to just ignore that one. There’s no way to help someone if they don’t think Assange’s extradition hearing is one of the most critical legal moments of the last hundred and next hundred years.
- DanBC 6y ago
  This ludicrous hyperbole is ridiculous. The only things the hearing will look at are "The judge must be satisfied that the conduct amounts to an extradition offence (dual criminality), none of the bars to extradition apply, where applicable, there is prima facie evidence of guilt (in accusation cases), and whether extradition would breach the person’s human rights." You not knowing nor liking the law doesn't change it. Almost no-one in the thread understands what an extradition hearing is. (How do I know? Look at all the people saying the judge makes the decision.)
  - mlthoughts2018 6y ago
    Have you been following Assange’s extradition hearing whatsoever? The judge in this situation has taken extreme and alarming actions in limiting defense witness testimony, refusing to allow witnesses or lines of questioning that unequivocally demonstrate the prosecution to be lying, incorrect and deeply misleading, has refused to allow normal closing arguments, refused to allow a witness who was tortured in Guantanamo to affirmatively state that fact (which the ECHR ruled was fact), denied in-person and remote access to Amnesty International and many other international observers, refused to grant an adjournment for the defense to process sudden new charges tacked on at the last minute and refused to allow the defense to call new witnesses in light of the new charges. What planet are you living on where you don’t think the judge (acting on extrajudicial political orders) is controlling the decision?
    - DanBC 6y ago
      You've got your information from Craig Murray, and as lots of people have said: he's unreliable. > What planet are you living on where you don’t think the judge (acting on extrajudicial political orders) is controlling the decision? This sentence right here is a perfect example of how intensely frustrating these threads are. You do not understand English extradition law, but you're going to post heated rants about the case anyway. The secretary of state for the Home Office (currently Priti Patel) makes the decision. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review The US is a Type A, category 2, territory. > Requests from these territories need decisions by both the Secretary of State and the courts. > The extradition process to these territories follows these steps: extradition request is made to the Secretary of State Secretary of State decides whether to certify the request judge decides whether to issue a warrant for arrest the person wanted is arrested and brought before the court preliminary hearing extradition hearing Secretary of State decides whether to order extradition > Requesting states are advised to submit an initial draft request to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) or, in the case of Scotland, to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) extradition team, so that any potential problems can be resolved. > Extradition hearing > The judge must be satisfied that the conduct amounts to an extradition offence (dual criminality), none of the bars to extradition apply, where applicable, there is prima facie evidence of guilt (in accusation cases), and whether extradition would breach the person’s human rights. > If the judge is satisfied that all of the procedural requirements are met, and that none of the statutory bars to extradition apply, he or she must send the case to the Secretary of State for a decision to be taken on whether to order extradition. > Appealing judge’s decision: High Court > The judge’s decision whether to send a case to the Secretary of State can be appealed. The requested person can ask for permission to appeal the judge’s decision to send the case to the Secretary of State. Any application for permission must be made to the High Court, within 14 days of the date of the judge’s decision. However the High Court will not hear the appeal unless and until the Secretary of State orders the requested person’s extradition (see below). > If the District Judge orders the requested persons discharge, the requesting state can ask the High Court for permission to appeal that decision. Again, any application for permission to appeal must be made within 14 days of the judge’s order. If the High Court grants permission it will go on to consider the appeal. If the High Court allows the appeal, it will quash the order discharging the requested person and send the case back to the District Judge for a fresh decision to be taken. Secretary of State’s decision > The Secretary of State must order extradition unless the surrender of a person is prohibited by certain statutory provisions in the 2003 Act. The requested person may make any representations as to why they should not be extradited within 4 weeks of the case being sent to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State is not required to consider any representations received after the expiry of the 4 week period. > Extradition is prohibited by statute if: the person could face the death penalty (unless the Secretary of State gets adequate written assurance that the death penalty will not be imposed or, if imposed, will not be carried out) there are no speciality arrangements with the requesting country – ‘speciality’ requires that the person must be dealt with in the requesting state only for the offences for which they have been extradited (except in certain limited circumstances) the person has already been extradited to the UK from a third state or transferred from the International Criminal Court and consent for onward extradition is required from that third state or that Court (unless the Secretary of State has received consent) > If none of these prohibitions apply, the Secretary of State must order extradition. Or, if surrender is prohibited, the person must be discharged. > The Secretary of State has to make a decision within 2 months of the day the case is sent, otherwise the person may apply to be discharged. However, the Secretary of State can apply to the High Court for an extension of the decision date. More than one extension can be sought if necessary. Appealing Secretary of State’s decision: High Court > Appeal is only possible with the leave (permission) of the High Court. Notice of application for leave to appeal must be sought within 14 days of extradition being ordered by the Secretary of State or discharge being ordered by the Secretary of State. Any appeal by the requested person against the decision of the judge to send the case to the Secretary of State will be heard at the same time as the appeal against the Secretary of State’s order, assuming permission is granted. > Appealing High Court decisions: Supreme Court > A requested person, or a requesting State, can apply for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the High Court’s decision. Notice of application for leave to appeal must be given within 14 days of the High Court decision. Permission can be granted either by the High Court or by the Supreme Court itself. Appeals to the Supreme Court can only be made if the High Court has certified that the case involves a point of law of general public importance. > Extraditing a requested person > Unless there is an appeal, a requested person must be extradited within 28 days of the Secretary of State’s decision to order extradition (subject to any appeal).

by acqq 6y ago

mlthoughts2018 6y ago

The parent comment can only be described as trolling. Your response is valiant but probably best to just ignore that one. There’s no way to help someone if they don’t think Assange’s extradition hearing is one of the most critical legal moments of the last hundred and next hundred years.

DanBC 6y ago
This ludicrous hyperbole is ridiculous. The only things the hearing will look at are "The judge must be satisfied that the conduct amounts to an extradition offence (dual criminality), none of the bars to extradition apply, where applicable, there is prima facie evidence of guilt (in accusation cases), and whether extradition would breach the person’s human rights." You not knowing nor liking the law doesn't change it. Almost no-one in the thread understands what an extradition hearing is. (How do I know? Look at all the people saying the judge makes the decision.)
- mlthoughts2018 6y ago
  Have you been following Assange’s extradition hearing whatsoever? The judge in this situation has taken extreme and alarming actions in limiting defense witness testimony, refusing to allow witnesses or lines of questioning that unequivocally demonstrate the prosecution to be lying, incorrect and deeply misleading, has refused to allow normal closing arguments, refused to allow a witness who was tortured in Guantanamo to affirmatively state that fact (which the ECHR ruled was fact), denied in-person and remote access to Amnesty International and many other international observers, refused to grant an adjournment for the defense to process sudden new charges tacked on at the last minute and refused to allow the defense to call new witnesses in light of the new charges. What planet are you living on where you don’t think the judge (acting on extrajudicial political orders) is controlling the decision?
  - DanBC 6y ago
    You've got your information from Craig Murray, and as lots of people have said: he's unreliable. > What planet are you living on where you don’t think the judge (acting on extrajudicial political orders) is controlling the decision? This sentence right here is a perfect example of how intensely frustrating these threads are. You do not understand English extradition law, but you're going to post heated rants about the case anyway. The secretary of state for the Home Office (currently Priti Patel) makes the decision. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review The US is a Type A, category 2, territory. > Requests from these territories need decisions by both the Secretary of State and the courts. > The extradition process to these territories follows these steps: extradition request is made to the Secretary of State Secretary of State decides whether to certify the request judge decides whether to issue a warrant for arrest the person wanted is arrested and brought before the court preliminary hearing extradition hearing Secretary of State decides whether to order extradition > Requesting states are advised to submit an initial draft request to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) or, in the case of Scotland, to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) extradition team, so that any potential problems can be resolved. > Extradition hearing > The judge must be satisfied that the conduct amounts to an extradition offence (dual criminality), none of the bars to extradition apply, where applicable, there is prima facie evidence of guilt (in accusation cases), and whether extradition would breach the person’s human rights. > If the judge is satisfied that all of the procedural requirements are met, and that none of the statutory bars to extradition apply, he or she must send the case to the Secretary of State for a decision to be taken on whether to order extradition. > Appealing judge’s decision: High Court > The judge’s decision whether to send a case to the Secretary of State can be appealed. The requested person can ask for permission to appeal the judge’s decision to send the case to the Secretary of State. Any application for permission must be made to the High Court, within 14 days of the date of the judge’s decision. However the High Court will not hear the appeal unless and until the Secretary of State orders the requested person’s extradition (see below). > If the District Judge orders the requested persons discharge, the requesting state can ask the High Court for permission to appeal that decision. Again, any application for permission to appeal must be made within 14 days of the judge’s order. If the High Court grants permission it will go on to consider the appeal. If the High Court allows the appeal, it will quash the order discharging the requested person and send the case back to the District Judge for a fresh decision to be taken. Secretary of State’s decision > The Secretary of State must order extradition unless the surrender of a person is prohibited by certain statutory provisions in the 2003 Act. The requested person may make any representations as to why they should not be extradited within 4 weeks of the case being sent to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State is not required to consider any representations received after the expiry of the 4 week period. > Extradition is prohibited by statute if: the person could face the death penalty (unless the Secretary of State gets adequate written assurance that the death penalty will not be imposed or, if imposed, will not be carried out) there are no speciality arrangements with the requesting country – ‘speciality’ requires that the person must be dealt with in the requesting state only for the offences for which they have been extradited (except in certain limited circumstances) the person has already been extradited to the UK from a third state or transferred from the International Criminal Court and consent for onward extradition is required from that third state or that Court (unless the Secretary of State has received consent) > If none of these prohibitions apply, the Secretary of State must order extradition. Or, if surrender is prohibited, the person must be discharged. > The Secretary of State has to make a decision within 2 months of the day the case is sent, otherwise the person may apply to be discharged. However, the Secretary of State can apply to the High Court for an extension of the decision date. More than one extension can be sought if necessary. Appealing Secretary of State’s decision: High Court > Appeal is only possible with the leave (permission) of the High Court. Notice of application for leave to appeal must be sought within 14 days of extradition being ordered by the Secretary of State or discharge being ordered by the Secretary of State. Any appeal by the requested person against the decision of the judge to send the case to the Secretary of State will be heard at the same time as the appeal against the Secretary of State’s order, assuming permission is granted. > Appealing High Court decisions: Supreme Court > A requested person, or a requesting State, can apply for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the High Court’s decision. Notice of application for leave to appeal must be given within 14 days of the High Court decision. Permission can be granted either by the High Court or by the Supreme Court itself. Appeals to the Supreme Court can only be made if the High Court has certified that the case involves a point of law of general public importance. > Extraditing a requested person > Unless there is an appeal, a requested person must be extradited within 28 days of the Secretary of State’s decision to order extradition (subject to any appeal).