I wonder if the legal framework between the two countries prevents third-party extradition (which could be used as a mechanism for future problem-solving). Curious that it hasn't been leaked.
Ecuador did not have an agreement in place with Sweden to act as a framework within which such a request could be allowed to go forward on Ecuadoran soil, which is what the embassy is. Until that agreement was reached, it was in fact a requirement that refuse Swedish extraterritorial interrogation requests.
Ironically, it would have been perfectly legitimate for Interpol to request on behalf of Sweden, and send Interpol investigators (some of whom could have bee
I wonder if the legal framework between the two countries prevents third-party extradition (which could be used as a mechanism for future problem-solving). Curious that it hasn't been leaked.
This is actually the first legitimate request.
Ecuador did not have an agreement in place with Sweden to act as a framework within which such a request could be allowed to go forward on Ecuadoran soil, which is what the embassy is. Until that agreement was reached, it was in fact a requirement that refuse Swedish extraterritorial interrogation requests.
Ironically, it would have been perfectly legitimate for Interpol to request on behalf of Sweden, and send Interpol investigators (some of whom could have bee
Tell us again how you are not a lap dog for the US gevernment.
"We've decided that the only logical recourse is to hand him over to a neutral third-party for questioning," said Ecuador and Sweden.
"Ooh, ooh, me, me! Right here!" responded the U.S.
It's not "fleeing" if he hasn't been charged with anything.
I didn't "flee" to work this morning. I commuted.