4 ms·

I found this interesting (by user Jenny on the linked page): No, he did NOT ask for protective custody (and I know as I'm in contact with his mother), this is

by morsch 14y ago

I found this interesting (by user Jenny on the linked page): No, he did NOT ask for protective custody (and I know as I'm in contact with his mother), this is how Sweden treats everyone being held pre-trial. There is a case right now where a guy who has been locked up like this for TWO YEARS is trying to get the supreme court to rule about his treatment. There is no time limit on how long anyone can be held like this, it can (and in many cases it has) go on for years. Amnesty and the European Council have criticized Sweden for this in the past.

walru 14y ago
..and this my friends is why Julian Assange wants nothing to do with being extradited there. Of course, there's also the fact that he'd be shipped to the US once they actually found him again.
- tptacek 14y ago
  It is no easier to extradite Assange from Sweden than it is from the UK, where he currently resides; both countries are parties to the ECHR. In fact, it's probably harder, as the consent of both the UK and Sweden would probably be required to extradite once he was removed to Sweden.
  - tisme 14y ago
    This is most likely false. You are stating this as a fact but there is some proof to the contrary: Sweden has already extradited people to the US in cases where they really shouldn't have whereas the UK has so far been quite reluctant to do so, see the Gary McKinnon case recently. More info here: http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA
    - tptacek 14y ago
      It looks like maybe you didn't read my whole comment.
      - tisme 14y ago
        It looks like maybe you didn't read the linked page.
      - vidarh 14y ago
        The "double consent" requirement is irrelevant all the time Sweden has in recent history violated their own laws as well as international treaties to hand political asylum seekers to the CIA for shipment back to the very regime they were fleeing from. Meanwhile, the UK actually relatively regularly refuse extradition requests. If I worried about the US government, I know very well where I'd rather be, and Sweden would be _far_ down that list.
WhaleCormbit 14y ago
Wow, this is unbelievable. Can I get a source on the case?
gcv 14y ago
No equivalent of the Sixth Amendment in Sweden, then?
- tptacek 14y ago
  Sure there is. Sweden is a signatory to the ICCPR, like most of the world, and the ICCPR prohibits arbitrary or indefinite detention, requires due process, and forbids torture and cruel punishment. Here's the most recent Periodic Report I could find for Sweden; these reports break down the ICCPR articles, provide some context for how the article is interpreted in the reporting country, and calls to light any issues the country has that complicate the interpretation: http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G07/456/75/PDF/G0745675.pdf?OpenElement http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G07/456/75/PDF/G0... To head off a very boring message board argument: having ratified the ICCPR (or, for that matter, having a strong constitution with guaranteed rights for the accused) doesn't automatically mean Sweden invariably respects those rights. But Sweden isn't a police state.

by morsch 14y ago

walru 14y ago

..and this my friends is why Julian Assange wants nothing to do with being extradited there. Of course, there's also the fact that he'd be shipped to the US once they actually found him again.

tptacek 14y ago
It is no easier to extradite Assange from Sweden than it is from the UK, where he currently resides; both countries are parties to the ECHR. In fact, it's probably harder, as the consent of both the UK and Sweden would probably be required to extradite once he was removed to Sweden.
- tisme 14y ago
  This is most likely false. You are stating this as a fact but there is some proof to the contrary: Sweden has already extradited people to the US in cases where they really shouldn't have whereas the UK has so far been quite reluctant to do so, see the Gary McKinnon case recently. More info here: http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA http://justice4assange.com/US-Extradition.html#WSJA
  - tptacek 14y ago
    It looks like maybe you didn't read my whole comment.
    - tisme 14y ago
      It looks like maybe you didn't read the linked page.
    - vidarh 14y ago
      The "double consent" requirement is irrelevant all the time Sweden has in recent history violated their own laws as well as international treaties to hand political asylum seekers to the CIA for shipment back to the very regime they were fleeing from. Meanwhile, the UK actually relatively regularly refuse extradition requests. If I worried about the US government, I know very well where I'd rather be, and Sweden would be _far_ down that list.

WhaleCormbit 14y ago

Wow, this is unbelievable. Can I get a source on the case?

gcv 14y ago

No equivalent of the Sixth Amendment in Sweden, then?

tptacek 14y ago
Sure there is. Sweden is a signatory to the ICCPR, like most of the world, and the ICCPR prohibits arbitrary or indefinite detention, requires due process, and forbids torture and cruel punishment. Here's the most recent Periodic Report I could find for Sweden; these reports break down the ICCPR articles, provide some context for how the article is interpreted in the reporting country, and calls to light any issues the country has that complicate the interpretation: http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G07/456/75/PDF/G0745675.pdf?OpenElement http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G07/456/75/PDF/G0... To head off a very boring message board argument: having ratified the ICCPR (or, for that matter, having a strong constitution with guaranteed rights for the accused) doesn't automatically mean Sweden invariably respects those rights. But Sweden isn't a police state.