Today’s Guardian:
“If extradited to Sweden under the EAW – a process that could be concluded quickly under the fast-track procedure – Assange will be vulnerable to other extradition requests from countries including the US.
The US has an extradition treaty with Sweden since the 1960s, when the nations agreed to “make more effective the co-operation of the two countries in the repression of crime”.
Extradition under the treaty is likely to face a number of obstacles, not least the fact that the likely charges facing Assange in the US – under the Espionage Act or other legislation protecting national security – are not included in the exhaustive list of offences set out in the law.”
So, out of curiosity, does this mean the FReeper opinion on international courts and international arrest warrants has changed in light of recent events?
I seem to recall George W Bush (and most conservatives on both sides of the Atlantic to be honest) being extremely hostile to even one atom of American national sovereignty being conceded to a foreign power, even in the context of international arrest warrants and the like. Which probably explains why the extradition treaty with the UK is so one-sided...