Events in Europe are showing just how terrified governments have become since Australian Wikileaks founder, Julian Assange, successfully hacked United States computers and revealed state secrets that severely embarrassed it's administration. It seems that the governments of America, Britain and Sweden have joined in a trumped up plot to deport Assange to Sweden where he would be vulnerable to a US arrest warrant - and deportation to the United States where he could face the death penalty.
Assange had fled to the Ecuadorian embassy in London where he has been granted political asylum. Amazingly, Britain is now threatening to withdraw that embassy's political accreditation and have the police storm the building and arrest Assange.. This could be the most savage attack on the principles of diplomatic immunity since the protocol was established centuries earlier.
Of all countries to lead the charge to dump political immunity, the least likely would seem to be Britain. This was the country that gave the world the tenets of democracy by way of " Magna Carta " and " Habeas Corpus ". It was the British Empire that imposed it's judicial system on half the world and that system of justice is now the foundation of law in most of those former colonies. It seems ludicrous that the attack on diplomatic immunity is condoned by that other great champion of the democratic process, the United States of America. During the " cold war " years, America upheld the principle of diplomatic immunity in the face of impossible odds.
Older folks may remember the time when Catholic Cardinal Josef Mindszenky spent fifteen years holed up in the US embassy in Budapest. The Cardinal had spoken out about the excesses of the Stalinist regime in Hungary and was facing a life sentence in a Communist gaol. The Americans gave him refuge despite long and constant aggravation from the Warsaw block which saw their embassy constantly surrounded and harassed by police.
The British seemed to have had a different outlook on diplomatic immunity back in 1984 when policewoman Yvonne Fletcher was on duty holding back a protest mob outside the Libyan embassy in London. A shot from within the embassy caused her death and there were calls for the murderer to face justice. Britain upheld the sanctity of immunity that protected the embassy and all those inside were allowed to leave the country unmolested. They travelled across London to the airport in embassy cars - which enjoyed the same diplomatic protection as the embassy buildings - and boarded a plane for Tripoli. It is interesting to note that Britain is now refusing that same protection to allow Assange to leave the country for Ecuador.
If Britain withdraws diplomatic immunity from the Ecuadoran embassy or allows the police to storm the building it will bring on a world change of monumental proportions. The sanctity of diplomatic immunity has already suffered damage following the 1981 storming of the United States embassy in Iran. That could be partly justified because the attackers were an enraged civilian mob, but the fact that the country's incoming leader - Ayatollah Khomeini held diplomats as captive pawns for 444 days served to make Iran a political outlaw from which it has yet to recover. It is still regarded by many as an outlaw regime.
Perhaps the present British change of direction can be dismissed as simply " a rush of blood " and sanity will return and common sense prevail. It seems that many world leaders are so frightened of Julian Assange and his capacity to penetrate their security and release secrets to the world that they are prepared to condone the dismantling of an institution that has served the world well.
Without diplomatic immunity the opportunity to exchange views will be lessened - and the world we live in will become an even more dangerous place !
No comments:
Post a Comment