SUPREME COURT 1-feb-2012 when assange and kristinn made it through the gate i raised my hand and

smiled a big yay hooray---he said softly"i'made it through" the paparazzi---or the assassins??? then he and team went through security the barrister female speaks executive parties swedish prosecutor cannot be a judicial authority no one can be a judge in her own cause a parochial common law concept natural justice codex europanus predates treaty rome basic norm of european printed case 63 pages 15 volumes supported judicial authority read with an extended meaning swedish prosecutor derived from the european framework decision which the 2003 act was to replace the appeal careful examination what is meant by judicial authority 2003 act a little longer in our submission it will end in the same place basic legal principle EAW constitutes a interference with individual liberty since the swedish prosecutor---she is not to EAW issue for 2003 act proceed: consider principles interp 2003 act interp judicial authority three broad areas the general context in which the framework was made legislative process the language of the framework decision third relevance to that and praxis member states swedish prosecutor---judicial authority decision of divisional court and see the flaws interp 3003 act 3 cases: cando armas volume 2 tab 22 2456 electronic (excellent microphones and clear audio unlike royal courts) mandatory for the hard copy and electronic copies matching---ammmend---persuasion---the nudge theory one of seven judges female. familiar to many members of the court---significant change in extradition practice in europe paragraph seven and paragraph 8 straight forward transposition twin assumptions provisions of part one greater cooperation principle to be applied 2003 act lord hope lord bingam paragraph 21---town council this is nt a n extradition system at all---paragraph---16 my lord---reference to lewis carroll through the looking glass system of backing of warrants requesting authority limited lord hope is identifying the radical effect of the framework 2003 grounds on which extradition can be refused a system of mutual recognition built on trust and confidence high level in EU heat in UK re lack of to protect those---the new system has to earn trust----to protect rights--- second important principle at framework decision trust which requires confidence the streamlining of extradition balanced by a streamlining of rights protection for the rights of individuals extradition treaties statutory destruction\liberty at stake rights removed by procedures framework decision if there are differences unlawful infringement of liberty difference goes to the framework J: extra protection----would inhibit extradition??!!! response: if there was an impossible compatible decision lord hope prepared all the way not to grapple with same wording in both instruments when looking at the term judicial authority broad ambit maintain trust and confidence by recognizing the individual the correct interpretation J purple tie: react difference answer: your lordship is absolutely right a general approach to construction we do have a fall back position case of dabas-- paragraph 2257 electronic---here similar analysis from lord bingam the propino case to framework decision lord hope---at paragraph 18 after looking at various obligation inherent in the existing procedures sufficient controls to decide whether or not surrender was in accord with the terms judicial state to question complexity and delay inimical to its objectives 7475 case of caldereli

whether judge was right to treat it as an accusation warrant this depends on mutual recognition--defer---to the judge-- 2246 paragraph 42 cannot in any view determine the matter one sees here the mutual trust and confidence on which the european arrest warrant the house of lords feels the trust of a foreign judeg that is undermined if the arrest warrant is made by a prosecutor no doubt it will be pointed out canoarmis case issue not addressed by the house of lords in the calderelli case lord bingam---rely on the fact there has been a domestic judicial decision----what is it that the domestic J issues answ if part one warrant is it properly categorized issuing judicial authority depends on the domestic law of the state the proper category whether for extradition or offense a form identifying the various features----clear isssue of discretion-whether it is proportionate proper approach for meaning propino principle framework decision individual rights to liberty must be carefully and properly applied core topic proper interp of the framework decision itself the framework the legislative process the 2003 act the language of the framework decision (footman) extradition applied in europe b4 framework entered # of treaties bilateral council of europe 1957 volume 3 of the appendix in the electronic numbering its 96 annnexed european convention---if we turn to the convention itself---article one deals with the obligation to extradict subject lay down request for an offense for the carrying out of a sentence the provisional court relied on a judicial authority meant on this convention the contracting parties to each other made by states not a system analogous to the backing of the warrant---it was a protocol between states. or that person is wanted a reference to the fact that a person is wanted for an offense or sentence diff than 2003 act 12 article same effect laid down in the party any arrest warrant the requirement law requesting party we then have the expalnatory report---volume 9 soft copy 3850 core volume if a court goes to 3850 under the heading obligation to extradict---article one bilateral convention france and germany thus the article has a bearing as a whole authorite judiciare---excludes police!!! keep your thumb in there and then take up the supplement 162 tab page 6275 i agree my lady this is why i am a hard copy fan (too bad we arent reading cablegate) article one second---continue en le texte francaise\les autorite propre mon dit des exclusion parque---prosecution (wood slab in court???) propre mon dit thos of course are not explanatory in the english the french text recognizes authority judiciary we submit that thats understandable with the english and french texts----the english does not use the purpose in article one to identify the authorities proceeding for the commission of the offense--- is the prosecution000 in french there is a distinction between the judicail authority and the prosecution--through the diplomatic channel thats all you get that is accompanied by an arrest warrant----different systerm my lord if we go back to article one---it for one wanted to serve a sentence for a conviction--irish civil liberties defender jim curran says into my ear "she is very good" re assange's lawyer all parties proceeding for the offense envisions situation in which authorites then if a court makes a detention order it would issue awarrant for an arrest origin is a bilateral treaty btw germany in france situation in sweden

my lord thats absolutely right look at the functions of the prosection and authority q; not concerned with a particular prosecution--extensive case law from the ECHR can constitute judicial authority we submit---this is a straightforward case---already examined--quite dense---57 convention the purpose of article one wholly diff from the nature of the parties proceeding explanatory in french different authority judiciare---established on a europe wide basis---that the clarity of function the parties who used these terms referred to this Ecommission on human rights ms. montgomery---this case law---irrelevant---impartial judge rather than a party with respect we say that she misses the point the factual matrix must be decided convention the term they chose to use echr did not seek to define qualify it bc it was understood concept of a judicial authority as used in a framework decision----english text french text 6148 6149 both out ogether-- one--five--four both english and french rtexts authentic. first. everyone has the security of liberty of person proscribed by law lawful arrest of detention to bring before competent legal authority on suspicion of an offensce 553 everyone arrested shall be brought before a judge to exercise judicial power---and entitled to a reasonable trial article 5 arrete l' autorite competant judicial the ref to the competent judicial authority---ultimately the frameworkk decision provisions--jug autre provisions in the convention french text---framework decision--6291---article six--autorite judiciare etat mission competant pour delivre mandate authorite judiciare in the french--claire's mate on right smiling and nodding same thing as judge authorized to issue judicial power second principle ECHR recognizes a diversity of legal systems but nevertheless imposes a boandary drawn very clearly re independence from th eexecutive and the parties--applied to mean prosecutors cannot exercise article 5 judicial authority to extradict shieser and switzerland i am sure your ladyship is right--german worse than french. judicial power---paragraph 27 promptly before contracting states and choice convention mentioned them---clearly recognize---sides magistra juge judge power not kept to adjudicating disputes---prosecuting authorities---find judicial auth--(super sleepy from no sleep) stricter requirements--wishes to emphasize th elimits---paragraph 3---abbreviated form for judge 51c synonym for 5c iter alia be independent of executor or parties may not take the form of arrests. if the person in power does not enjoy independence. offer gaurantees---judicial power---officer not identical with a judeg---must satisfy certain conditions--- in this the cour t confronts and appreciates the differenct legal systems--set s a clear limit on independence of the parties. context. all important. no one should be dispossessed. procedure---judicial category. the issue of deprivation of liberty. battery at 675 essentially to verify the provisions the person must be surrendered---removal of liberty---lose their job--a much more severe interferencer---than pretrial detention. where that leads us---european arrest warrant---what does that carry with it---individual should have the right to be heard---we will need to go to the framework decision----primary point--parties... must be taken to have done so-----two points---properly detained. giving the person a chance to be heard

i agree my lord query a diffferent ---tho = affecting power-- yes my lord---their rights have already been ... (see international law hit men) my case is they were legislating acquired case law---mean the same thing---a warrant or arrest---they would appear and ask to be let go---the problem of a single space---two from the right side judge speaks---nice voice--- home country provisional detentions about the european legal space i respectfully agree with your lordship the parties who eneterred into this decision for parties to maintain confidence safeguards will apply european court commission of human rights---they are there for a purpose---how well established---how framework was enterred into abu katada is in the bundle first of all the european commission volume six---authorities tab 57 338 decision of the european commission on human rights applicant on fraud---taken to stockholm---prosecutor informed of detention continued detention passage relied on by the divisional court--- under the heading article 3 definitions this explanatory memorandum accompanied a draft framework decision explanatory memorandum starts in the same bundle--article referred to definitions 1033 draft article three following EAW---request addressed for surrender of person who has been subject judgement issuing authority--- executing authority---the executor of the EAW express authority---prosecutor and judicial authority upon which the divisional court relied--whether public prosecutor could exercise judicial power---under heading 2---at seventy four at 76 analysis of the swedish prosecution sytem this factor alone prosecutors have independence the officer must also be independent of the party decide whether or not prosecution to be indicted public prosecution has detain power on reasonable suspicion of offence. heirarchy. superior prosecutor to lower. over the page---examine the facts---public prosecutor does not fulfill the requirement of independence-- 2999 concerns france (told by wikileaks supporter one could lose half one's income for supporting human rights and i must delete my blog that has her first name somewhere---wow---how is that for an information revolutionary) if that is not the meaning---with respect of the provisonal principle what is meant by judicial authority driven to ignore th eobvious i shall show the court---that its internally mendeev independence parties---judge meets those requirement second aspect our submission---the framework--in the knowledge of the case law---the wording in the french text the evolution of the framework decision the legislative process---as the two processes intertwined---the starting point---counsel--- creation of an area principles---4808 mutual recognition of judicial decisions and judgements and says that should become the cornerstone--of in relation to extradition---ref to fast track extradition procedures temporary UK delegation put forward 1999 document from the UK delegation mutual recognition criminal matters if you go to paragraph 11 how would mutual recognition work a minimum formality 4799 the common judicial area---public opinion---equivalent progress to rules and safeguards case law of the ECHR safeguards and guarantees the scope of mutual recognition---reference to search warrants---arrest warrants--- judicial decisions---specifically---reference to extradition arrest warrant and convictions---mutual recognition---replace arrest warrant---fast tracked extradition to be developed without justic eministry approval---operates between UK And Ireland--- this is historic the place where UK then broke its anti extraditon method a (of ireland jim curran says: no such place) section one one when a warrant has been issued by a judicial authority an application for the endorsement reason to believe person is in the area justice for execution in the part

a system where by a judicial authority in ireland can arrest somebody in england five five third judicial authority means judge judicial authority irish minister of justice: peace officer functions to serve warrant this list does not include PROSECUTORS or anyone who is not independent. we take it for granted: female judge: the key point judical authority 4803 euro warrants this concept should now be examined in detail---the criteria for the right of the fugitive---the fast track---in order for a pan european arrest warrant ---trust and confidence--the next stage in the evolution--sept 2001 considerable stress---provisional court---core bundle--- page 151 paragraph 39 of the judgement--and there you can see the reliance---of the divisional point explanatory document any authority proposal. wikileaks olympics: women lawyers for assange material interest: proposal: withdrawn what then happens is there is a meeting requested executing custodial sentence tiem 12:26 EC scrutiny committee measures being scrutinized at home as well--- they cant be hermetically sealed from each other nice voice talking----second from the right in fact, the first key point---the definition---what a european arrest warrant is---the englisha nd other language versions--- if you go to---article six--the full excrutiating pleasure--- article six---where here we have the issuing judicial authority (wow what an awesome smile from kristinn hrafnsson) effectively the member states did their own drop complete drop at some poitn the commission--is not the decision maker---and we submit that it was wrong--- the final wording of th eframework decision. excelent law class--- referred to in article three---shall refuse to execute in the following cases--so that is---the judical authority to execute arrest warrant commons or lords---commons---- second to left making joke second over right---its on the WEB---thought there was considerable --- let us make do with the other case---volume fourteen of the other--- to provide for control extradition agreement s by contrast nonmember state first tiem member state----designated judicial authority judicial authority in an independent manner--- would not be obliged ---in reply be issued by an issuing authority what is or is not a court clearly not authorities spelleld out on a bill court decision ability anything other acceptance of the principle that the meaning---scutiny committee said--the next thing that happened---is that hte european commmission produced a green papper discussion document---for a european public prosecutor----proposal for misallocated funds---in the course of it---made comments---about european arrest warrant---passed to judges in order of seniority (so says jim curran) respect for fundamental rights compulsion---subject to review---so when you see a judge of freedomes---a court heading--conducting investigations (breathe deeply) european prosecutor could carry out---A---community investigation methods---hearing or questioning persons the lowest level of the heirarchy subject to review by the courts freeze assets second level of the heirarchy his decision subject to judicial review---arrest warrant custody order these measures seriousness to obtain a ----in particular---european---any relevant national mutatis mutandis applies well generally to wikileaks : changing that which needs be changed framework doc proceeds on basis the issue of the arrest warrant---common prosecution area---and said---areas jurisdiction

if european prosecutor is in state A then they apply to a court and then get individ three categories of coercive measures in a heriarchy decision subject to . . . serious measre to be issue dby a court---heirarchy of different kinds of measures----evidence warrant issuing authority green paper bore some fruit tafu eu gets power to make regulations ---power in treaty for a eu prosecutor----it has not beeen done yet--- the wording of the framework decision national legislation two key passages judicial decision issued by a member state-- battery 27% (declining value was 7 hours once) the story continues in th e (also delighted this is not a regurgitation of july hearings . . . yet) notes taken by mary rose lenore eng 2 onward transmission, extradited to another state--- consent before the competant authorities to make clear voluntarily requested person a process, engaging the issuing of a public prosecutor, so my lord, my lady we submit the language of the framework decision, drafting process, should not include the public safeguard, thru out EU to promote the necessary degree of confidence---the interp of the framework decision itself prosecutor court of justice public prosecutor question convention operate left second over----not sure---harder to understand his accent. ambiguity if the states are in breach of the framework decision----there is nothing in a framework decision---the point is if a non-judicial authority issues an arrest warrant----the answering state has no reason to comply to accept the warrants---its entirely legitimate to comply---that's why the 2003 act does not go further than---judicial authority european commission---might be accepted---equally not consciously extraordinary vagueness and casualness of what is a judicial authority the implementation . . . irish legislation . .. not generally prosecutors---ministry of justice---commmission is powerless to do anything about it---2014 commmission powerless oddity---criticized by evaluation team---yet keeps renewing the validity. some states in breach---some---meaning of the framework decision---publishes---the commission--- there is a final report from the council in relation to jud authority deep ambiguity unsatisfactory implementation a need for an authoritative court judgement other EU instruments--- paragraph 119 for a european public prosecutor---for coercive measures that are less severe--a statement of opinion---that is amde by european prosecutors---page 1697--- lovely to be here--feel better after coffee--- 1697 electronic---streamlining the electronic law form desired i shall receive that tentatively then this received tentatively by judges and prosecutors 1654 opinion on the relationship and prosecutors that the rule of law be gauranteed public defendents and victims judicial review 3. the proper performance of prosecutors and judges-distinct an dindependent--ccp---in relation--- they refer to the on the part of any officer which does not exclude higher authority restrict ot minor sanctions should not overlap prosecutiion independent and impartial----key players mutual trust---in this context---imparative judicial proceeding protection of human rights (see international law hit men) printed version paragraph six the diversity of national systems----diff role of diff prosecutorial approach the judge's role---complimentary independence of judiciary suspect accused victim---and where

the distinct role---rule of law---basis of prosecution policy paragraph 20-25 in particular function of judging basis of th elaw perogative of the judiciary continueing crim proceedings. binding decisions in some areas. no right of appeal--- established case law of the ECHR the severity of the consequences--interpol sued--- vexed question with the respondent---the cables----in for how to be handled individual states---supplementary guide---these documents are agreed---if we look first at the summary we can see that there are two types of warrants accusation warrants 11 states designated prosecut 7 judge 2 min of justice convic warrant 10 prosec 4 judge 6 ministry of justice (or with sweden the national police) cannot draw an inference---significant number of member states---to national police force---that ministry of justice in any rational sense of the term (apple factory deaths---aluminum fires haunting---in ipad factory) that is correct yes some of the articles can't work unless the executing how can these articles be working when ??/ good sympathy--- or simply the prosecutor---2 from right---judge situation is unsatisfactory recognized by the commission volume twelve from the authorities bundle irrespective practical disadvantages restricting the mandate of nonjudicial authorities that is clearly directed at ministries of justice---acknowledge that the submission about ministry of justice issued warrant and then the issue with prosecutors tolerated---this a report from the council---from the president what is the proper interpretation of the act the evolution of the language decision 2003 act in parliament that a european arrest warrant should be valid only of the judicial authority hard to understand: two over from left lord, the individual extracts from hansard---the complete lack of ambiguity---the reports of the select committee---they trigger ammendments---the home affairs select committee-- what is the mischief? select committee report why judicial is included--the concern was that in the absence of that word there would be inadequate safeguards for the liberty of the subject not entirely clear when one reads the whole of the statement whether one looks at hansard or not---and we submit that the inclusion---the ammendment of the bill to include the word judicial---that parliament was concerned to protect against warrants that are not properly regarded as judicial--- ECHR article 5 to prevent arbitrary detention scheme and framework decision legislated on broader terms--9 page 2152 electronic irish equiv. european arrest warrant---2156 definition 2003 EAW judicial authority member state---over the page----judicial authority---magistrate---or other-- -to perform functions or similar too---section 33 supplementary what we will see section 33 is the section that gives the power to issue the EAW the irish version expressly excludes issueing state violation of article 5---lord 2 from left im not lord i dont suggest that---the point that i make---it is not a point that is made by the UK parliament--- that is the point--Q: is it capabable if the member state designated a private prosecutor under the irish statute that would be significant---sdesignated in a member state--- actively encourages them to do so----flaw ofg min cooperation ---and of course---one of the parties was UK has not agreed to anything greater--the term judicial authority===extended term 2 fm left intones reply: if jud auth means any authority----then it is emptied of content---the phrase judicial is

adding nothing--- you can define a word to mean anything the irish define it to mean anything approved by state--- their executing auth is the high court--youd expect that from a common law jurisdiction set the standard alta revisias irish high court on the construction of this 2003 act what permits--- UK only what required that brings me then---what are the implications on the status of the swedish prosecutor---very clear---simple case---role and function--- expressly commission in ECHR clear finding that the swedish prosecutor is not independednt of the parties----the same message from swedish evaluation report---if court goes to --- REVOLUTION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW NOW TAKING PLACE legal dept publication force local prosecution task sweden does not follow investigating judge model--- surveillance protection strong prosecutors and police issue warrants in sweden---national police board---EAW swedish national police force---even if the divisional court---the original commission---that proposal made it clear as sweden has failed to implement the framework decision---THE ONLY QUESTION IS: how badly? there is a description of the swedish law relational to the EAW only issued if justified---estimated time it costs requested--- serious criminality--- strong tie to sweden whether its proportionate to issue the EAW tentative suggestion even if the swedish prosecutor-- SVE court of appeal--converted to a EAW and under swedish law--- afurther discretionary judgement----not of detaining somebody but requiring their ---across boardiers in a court in absentia--- conditional precedent court order for detention not whether they should be detained but if they should be extradited submit flaws decision paragraph 33 story ideas--- (dalit law) (confetti) (wikileaks gold stars) 34 much assistance from hansard---89 act van der holst---amsterdam issued an arrest warrant--basis of the jurisdiction---in 1870 volume threee of the van der holst this is a case under the old 1870 extradition act-- made by a state not a judicial authority-- with evidence the arrest warrant didnt fall within the scope of the act ten the internal numbering it is conceded the warrant not a judicial document the simple answer act is inclusive warrant is including nothing in treaty requiring a judge or magistrate signiture--- why would sweden be refffing this 1870 method? two diff meanings---the reasons then followed---in the first place--the term judicial---each---reps three fold branches of state fundamental judicial and legislative branch (funny here at the house of lords spin off sup ct.) status of a prosecutor does have diversity whether or not they are judicial enjoy the decisions---they quote the cordova the point of shesa---practice---limit is drawn by the independence from the parties---divisional court---cordot----contrary to what is directed here--- memorandum attached to the original not limited to authorities as such 1957 commission battery 71% laptop older (battery was burning fast on the newer one) designate state diversity with respect confused teh purpose of article 6 is--from amongst the pool---the purpose of article six---can designate-we say jus distraction recognize prosecutors can be included---prosecuting authority out of context commonwealth judge eric holder meets--wikileaks atty simpsons wikileaks TV RT big news week missing the point anybody who makes decision is adjudicating deciding the proportionality test is being satisfied--for the point ---the mere description

in that case they satisfied---again to say---that has no bearing with the position wren architecture helps the justice feel more real. but nice to have such a bright and well amplified courtroom and such polite judges. very supreme. the key whereby---second from left---speaks my lord---decision is in the supplementary bundle---tab on 4.2 key passage paragraph in this discuss ground appeal four---temple---not to be a judicial authority sumations of the lord advocate----none of this whether the netherlands-- if UK enterred into extradition---agreement---only if member state is worthy confidence the danger---scottish eyes---would not be a jud. auth. in scotland therefore----authority of the chief--- graple with the point not mere description not addressing the points we make at all--what one is putting confidence in----second--fm right furthest right---incorrect reasoning not terribly impressive going back to the divisional court judgement--- then ananda-- english court--- which the benefit of much fuller argument----maybe the circumstances----will ordinarily reply---- recognition of other state as inclusive then ref min justice and that the designation of min justice v. framework decision here the divisional court---the mere fact---could not be conclusive---there is a question of substance--the warrant is not valid---the court otreject ananda--- central with mac--- we received the lord advocate's submissions to reply in writing in argument would you like a short not from us on the topic third from left speaks ECJ and the NS fundamental rights re: extradition to greece---re KRA its interesting a warrant issued by a ministry of justice would not be a proper warrant--- which indicates that the . . . interesting because it invites a question why the ministry of justice mission: it is incompatible---judicial is separate from the executive and the parties and the legislative (key for the social democrat bribe scandal) the beginning and end of this case. principle name---difficult to see the principle as lesss fundamental--- self evident---if the judicial body---evidence---consider the merits of the challenge---of the executive---but not he parties---a decent degree of the executive the adversarial prosecutional ECommission on HR conclude the prosecutor is being asked to extradite when he has not been charged any offense offers video conference how can a prosecutor---make--- a functional prob---can not be an impartial judge-- appear to be from pinochet nemo judix rule judges who are biased this is the core meaning the particpant cannot function in a judicial way--goes to roman law european and not parochial common law--- 14th century 15th century latin and english divisional court justice role of---soca to determine whether judicial authority exists we respectfully agree with that---paragraph 49 divisional no challenge to be made---it is necessary to consider party to proceedings--- altho a prosecutor---in pursuance proceedings---it would therefore mutual confidence circumstances necessary from a court mutual confidence is not enhanced ordinarily . . . both parties in proceedings---judges unease---that party is the judge--ceases to get higher standard of scrutiny----it is not a part 1 warrant to get in operation of his system. demonstrates the incoherence of the divisional court--house of lords---uncertainty respondent on this appeal is offerred no clear test for a judicial/ nonjudicial authority your lordships---the SVEA court of appeal has not endorsed the EAW. they took another plan. my lord my lady unless there are any more q these are the submissions 2nd from left speaks SVEa ct of appeal upheld a domestic detention order--what does this mean--- they were not concerned with extradite---only if he were in sweden he could be arrested--- check on the interpol class action separate discretion individual age factor---separate act of discretion--the court of appeals---he could be detained in sweden they reduced the warrant 275 svea---

continued to be detained in absentia-- the eaw will be ammended so says the 2nd from right good point. a press announcement. reference of reduction. decision is 445. permission to appeal trangression of appeal danger abscond there were written submissions put in his behalf ex parte they dont address the issues as htey relate to him arrest warrant and whetehr there was probable cause--- end presentation from assange lawyer ########################### montgomery now circumstances of how authority recognized assange passes note to blue sweater partial figure the difficulty is not measures--which evolve adjudicated between two parties--the issues of only one party is under consideration mr assange subjecting him to a process of extradition almost inevitably. whether by police tone has changed. two components seek arrest. criminal process. claire is not as melodious voice wise. it feels harsh. pressured. power to adjudicate. the flaw in the whole appraoch taken by the appelants---the answer is not necessarily---part of it is the preliminary part---the commencing the process---there is no reason---exercise in power. = second from right asks what judicial means. claire montgomery: in your interp---we could strike---arrrest and surrender---crim prosecution--extraneous? he puts word in her mouth. the decision must be taken as a---she says---without reference. political role--some function. if we ++++ taking a break now--- deplores his politics. mary rose lenore eng 3 judge speaks: the new scheme political accountability replaced with judicial accountability she has a lovely voice---the only woman on the court montgomery: arrest and surrender execution what is required fundamental rights judicial intervention judicial means one thing at one time its axiomatic (nihilists for nothing) different situation axiomatic in the framework article 5,4 rights---these are what MP dominic raab and cameron are against---!!!! if we exceeded this appeal---second from right speaks--- take 1957 convention---how many actually ratified and appplied---nationals---sensitive----it might well be not present in the convention montgomery: in number of states party----38 states---2001 we have in the electronic number---thirty left---in relation to those---there were significant numbers---nationals---in relation---the position altered. there were similar schemes in relation to EU 95, 96 the simplified schemes that existed req. all states to limit 5 years nationals---parties to be simplified---the exlusion of the political--- (in sweden highly political bribes-lobby--conflict of interest---) under article 95 extradition under shengen information system you cant simply say the position had moved on considerably by the time the framework decision direct contact without reservatiosn---without the involvement and with involvement of police the extradition act article 95---shengen requests---were specifically to be regarded as . . . for a transitional period--even though they came from police---- (not good) habitual simple scheme---request by public prosecutors----why the nords are so simple--- why. the term judicial authority---continental autonomous meaning---those authorities---properly be regarded as judicial authorities. german french authority---clearly appreciated from court french

constitution courts and the parque. eng 4 UK Supreme Court day 2 sweden versus assange lord mance is my fave second from left lord brown is good lady hale only woman 5th lord walker center lord phillips president dyson far right lord kerf walker 3rd fm left alexi mostrous told me mark stephens and/or FSI may be suing julian assange for unpaid legal bills i asked what he was seeking comment from mark stephens on before court started as per my accidental evesdrop yesterday JA front lobby: strolls alone arran meets KH and JA. i was trying to tell him the glass panels at supreme court security reminded me of the gorillas who occupy the Washington DC Zoo. i was struck by their plight as a child and horrified that humans would lock them up so with a tv and a room, but the glass prison effect . . . JA said he likes this court that they don't have to show power because they have power (witty and true assangism) the mottos: sages and laws of this realm: affirmed. if JA were a sage would the Sup Ct then need respect him. DINAH ROSE if a court looks on a second page under safeguarding human rights no referene ECHR safe trial or a judicial authority framework make this explicit human rights test case make clear the national judge may lead to an infringement CLAIRE MONTGOMERY as is common ground it is clear under that provision authorities were knowledged in 1957 the convention itself the court the reference to being included in concept hard copy "hard copy coming up" 79 50 for explanation 3850 obligation to extradite julian drinks water i want to show my lordship and your lady 6205 (soccer---the sport of law) previous flag 1996 makes the point (braingarbage side note: 2005 sup ct established---to sep leg and judicial) rather more material than material by miss rose whether it was in fact meant to convey judicial authority woman judge: i dont have the additional materials the power to give notice direct notice in reference to the decision freamework ---removes---state to state---then judicial to judicial--correction from yesterday uk brought eu to force in 9999 there is a larger number still south korea european convention 50 members straining its limits second over fm left--- or other competant authorities some countries notify prosecutors in which rubric ministries of justice not all continental france judiciare magistrar de parque (french justice no paragon: racial decisions made by lone judge who accuses and tries and condemns) hearing flag eleven julian sued on eve of extradition hearing by mark stephens---who has been defending phone hackgate victims denmark competant authorities authorize public prosecution authorities and their police officers finland article 14 ministry of justice constable germany uses competant judicail authorities nominates the public prosecutors office indicat ewhere the relevant authority is the prosecution

office. nomination page seven. judicial authorities make req to prosec lies with min justice netherlands at page 8 has article 14 sarah harrison not present in the court room she is missed the netherlands judicial authorities their defining public prosecutors relevant judical authority sweden unsurp. the pirate bay supreme court denies nom prosecutor general and other prosecutors shengen treaty in our sub it is hardly likely that in countries that have allowed them to be should abandon stat quo 195 large supplemental 158 supplement the article 95 provision on electronic 6221 flag one by bait who may through stephens suit may keep JA in england people req. to go to prison in my respect provided for in a national law admin of just whose decision can be characterized as judicial many of you judical authority can go that far there is a fall back position under french constitution prosecutor second from right asks the best questions! claire resp falling within the exercise of crim authority prag thought in france he says: in france . .. there 1958 constitution france swedish constitution guarantees fredom on info and equality of women and minorities and free speech and the right to shelter in first four sentences. two parts magistrar du parque (prosecutors) in continental sense prosecutot judical prosecutorial too restrictive (second over left) coming on heels of 911 julian left hand in L on face judicial decisions she goes on: sorry on shengen article95 6221 flag when framework decision came in time available to us a complete list of auth then we have art. 98 decisions wanted but not to be extradicted valid shengen request a court who will assange oi oi oi noh8ter blog WIN arran advises jim curran adjust coat austria denmark police estonia police boards prosec finland germany hungary police--note the extradition debate 24 notes on mistreatment in these countries swiss---center (fourth) he brings up shengen force other parts article 95 request nonono there is a new shengen information system see interpol class action for wrongfully done EAW judicial authority narrow meaning apol for spelling clare's name as claire i said "hi claire" on the way in in relation to other UK process the only other scheme other framework draft final form of the decision the nordic state scheme for our lordships and lady shearer book page 5497 the relevant description is at 5498 just over two thirds on the way down request can be one four one australia high commmssion to my right---irish civil liberties jim curran to my left @m_cetera here and @storysearcher @justice4assange sit second row right corner supporters from germany here. claire: ii indicated during the submissions made by miss rose before the district swedish prosecutor to make a request a domestic detention on basis of probable cause. an accusation the framework decision precendent for a conviction i'm looking at pilger article

paragraph six european arrest warrant same effect articles one and two box domestic process as you in sweden as in germany the box filled ina s with domestic warrant the conflicting decisions below lord dyson concl was not a reference for EAW for the reasons set out there the present divisional courts other decisions its entirely understandable that a EAW in domestic law of the arresting state---go. by definition::two from left asks where? 81 c evidence of enforceable judgement an arrest warrant or other enforcable preceded by ex hypothecae that must precede the EAW being issued first arrest second EAW the only gal judge : comes from the word other; where does this say that it has to be a judicial decision anything on which it points unequiv the req for domestic legality new slant: left 2 over: any def EAW sought under framework: there would be a domestic decision left two from right q then issuance found in the second appendix this was in fact an expert opion electronic 951 hard copy court identifies the page---electronic 212 hard copy 78 digital satygraha EAW to validate that process four submissions his lawyer swedish supreme court a fully argued challenge in sweden the EAW was issued issued november dated december stockholm dropped it---judges point out EAW being ammended---second from right has the poshest accent maximum certified then SVEA ct of appeal thought that the domestic order not extra section 9 of the swedish act then now obviously one of the problems ventilated at all when it emerged from ms rose one of the problems we've had sixth of december turn to deal with the drafting history translation mirror any concern about the proposal ventilatate earlier today com prop as miss rose has confirmed as it finally emerged at appendix 3 hard copy page 1140 a september draft which turned into a final the terms of that draft hard copy 10-30 that is on the face of it sept. emerged those who had the function under domestic law none of that changed the only reference to a court in part of the potential process the need for a hearing can i just take the court through what we respectfully suggest the commission proposal firstly court has appendix three eleven 41 paragraph two makes quite clear the purpose mutual recog judicial judges ipso fact recognize extradition JA turns around talks to kristinn and jennifer extended definitions not all authorities clare montgomery hasnt read this news-and-views/opinion/152-sleepwalking-into-dangerous-territory a day in the life of a wikileaks ninja---might consist of some guerrilla photo shoot. a punk rock song. a ripped blog. a comment on another ninja's ripped wikileaks blog. a letter to some really important figure in the wikileaks scene. a letter to some really important enemy of wikileaks. a phone call to some really important wikileaks supporter. a surprise videoblog and phone call starring some to some really important enemy of wikileaks at the state department or the US Attorney's office in alexandria, virginia.

the creation of some new blog--youtube channel--vimeo. a work of art. a package sent by mail. an article read. a conversation on a bus. Sleepwalking into Dangerous Territory Lizzie O'Shea and Jen Robinson Failure of the European Arrest Warrant framework from a human rights perspective Julian Assange is the most well-known person in the world currently facing extradition. His case highlights some concerning developments in the law of extradition, in particular, the system of European Arrest Warrants (‘EAW’). Whatever the merits of the case against Assange under Swedish law, like everyone facing an EAW, he has every right to challenge the basis of his extradition. His case provides an insight into the more general problems of EAWs, which should concern all human rights advocates, extradition practitioners and policy-makers. Such insights may serve as a warning in Australia of what might happen if an overly expedient approach is taken to extradition treaty provisions. 1 Extradition under international law At international law, there is no duty on states to extradite individuals for the purpose of carrying out criminal proceedings in another country. But it is also a recognised principle of international law that states have legal authority over individuals within their geographic borders and can have mutual treaty obligations to extradite requested individuals. As such, a web of bilateral and multilateral treaties has emerged over time as circumstances have increasingly required a multistate approach to crime. Issues that have motivated this include the increase in trans-national crime, particularly in the digital age (and an increased capacity of enforcement agencies to police it) and the rise of the perceived threat of terrorism. Australia, like most states, has a raft of bilateral treaties with different countries which determine whether an individual can be extradited from Australia. 3 Some countries have developed multilateral treaties in respect of extradition. The most obvious example is the EAW system which applies to members of the European Union (‘EU’). These treaties, as a body of international law instruments, have generally shared a range of underlying principles. As evidence of state practice, these shared principles arguably form the basis of customary international law. The principles include: 1. the concept of double criminality: that the offence is really an offence in both the requesting and requested countries; 2. speciality: that the person who is extradited may only be prosecuted with the offence for which the extradition was granted; 3. political prosecutions: many countries will not surrender an individual if the proceedings are tainted by inappropriate political considerations; 4. the possibility of certain forms of punishment: most states will not surrender an individual if there is a substantial risk that they may face torture. Many countries also refuse to allow extradition to a country where the individual may face the death penalty; 5. jurisdiction and citizenship: a state may refuse to extradite its own citizen as a rule. In

such a situation, the state may have jurisdiction to prosecute the alleged crime itself, if there is a suitable extra territorial crime; 6. the possibility of a breach of human rights: a state may elect to refuse extradition if the result may be a breach of human rights (which also relates to 4 above); and 7. prima facie case: whether there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate there is a prima facie 2 4 against the accused. These principles and corresponding jurisprudence were developed to protect the individual from the exercise of arbitrary power by the state and preserve the sovereignty of participating states. An effective system of extradition will recognise the need for those accused of crimes to face justice, but balance this with safeguards to ensure respect for procedural fairness and confidence in the criminal justice system of the requesting authority. The EAW framework After several years of preparation, the EAW framework was adopted in 2006. The foundations of the system were established shortly before 9/11, the events of which ‘rapidly catapulted’ it to completion. 6 In short, it was rushed through in the wake of the terrorist attacks in late 2001. In this climate of fear, there was a call for authorities to be given greater capabilities to prosecute terrorism offences. Historically, members of the EU have had a clear interest in building on the co-operative basis which sits at the heart of the political project. As one scholar noted, prior to 2001 there was a tendency for ‘extradition within the EU to be slow, complex and political in nature — unsuitable for the frontier-free European judicial space to which the European Union aspires’. A shared understanding and respect for legal and political processes among members underpinned the EAW system (‘mutual recognition’). The system has created categories whereby, when certain crimes are alleged (ie serious crimes deemed extraditable offences: Framework List offences), the requirement of double criminality has been removed. Additionally, the EAW system also relaxes the requirement that states show a prima facie case against the accused. The human rights considerations have also been eased on the basis that a transfer within Europe means the accused will have recourse to the European Court of Human Rights (‘ECHR’). The EAW framework may seem just a natural next step in the development in the law of extradition, especially given the co-operative nature of the EU and the principle of mutual recognition between EU states. However, there are good reasons why the law of extradition has traditionally prioritised the protection of the individual over expediency. Pressure to create a system based on mutual recognition, which was fast and efficient, meant that the concerns of individuals and their circumstances came a distant second. For many, including Assange, this has had devastating human consequences and raised serious questions about the integrity of the system. 5 7 Problems with EAWs: Assange as a case study Assange’s case provides an instructive example of the problems with the EAW framework. He is now fighting extradition for crimes that do not exist in the UK — or in Australia, for that matter. The four accusations are unlawful coercion, two counts of sexual molestation and ‘minor rape’

as described under Swedish law. The EAW system classifies crimes into categories according to seriousness, with the 32 Framework List offences deemed the most serious. These Framework List offences are deemed to be extraditable offences, removing the test of double criminality. 8 Neither unlawful coercion nor sexual molestation constitute Framework List crimes. Assange is therefore able to make arguments about double criminality: namely, that the conduct alleged by Sweden would not amount to a crime in England. The fourth allegation however, is classified as rape, which is a Framework List offence and therefore the Swedish authorities are not required to satisfy the double criminality requirement. Under English and Australian law, rape is based on consent and the accused’s reasonable belief as to consent. There is no allegation in this case that either woman said ‘no’ to Assange nor is it alleged that he did not believe them to have consented to the sexual interaction. In Sweden, the crime of sexual molestation is based on whether sexual integrity is deemed to have been harmed. Rape and the problematically described offence of ‘minor rape’ are not based on the notion of consent: they are based on the use of physical force in acts of sex. This definition has been expanded over time, in recognition of the fact that rape does not always involve physical coercion, to now include ‘minor rape,’ ie where the woman could be deemed to have been in a ‘helpless state’. But because Sweden ticked the Framework List ‘rape’ box on the EAW, Assange cannot argue about whether the conduct alleged in the fourth allegation would amount to a crime and be prosecuted under English law, which is, in fact, unlikely. Moreover, Assange may have concerns about being tried in a closed court, which Sweden permits in sexual assault cases, in a judicial system in which lay judges (jurors) are appointed by political parties. Important provisions in Australian law exist to protect complainants in sexual offences cases, such as anonymity through the use of video-link testimony. However, in Sweden, all press and public are excluded, a clearly disproportionate interference with the right to a public trial and a possible breach of Article 6 of the European Charter of Human Rights. But any concerns about human rights under the EAW Framework must be taken up in the ECHR. This serves as cold comfort, as applicants must wait up to five years to have their matter heard. The future possibility of an ECHR application comes far too little too late: any application would be heard long after Assange had completed his potential jail term in Sweden. Despite this practical reality, as commentators have noted, the possible breach of the European Convention on Human Rights has ‘generally proved a fruitless ground of challenge’. 10 To successfully resist extradition under the Framework, based on human rights concerns, is immensely difficult. The high bar in respect of the human rights violation is nearly impossible to meet, an issue which was criticised in the recent UK Parliamentary review of the human rights implications of UK extradition policy. 11 Assange is a high profile prisoner. His experience has brought to light the widespread problems with EAWs, a campaign which has, until now, been less than high profile. There is a litany of troubling stories about EAWs. Edmund Arapi, a UK resident, was tried and convicted in absentia of the killing of Marcello Miguel Espana Castillo in Genoa Italy in 2004. 12 This is despite the fact that Arapi had not left the UK at all between 2000 and 2006. Arapi was arrested by British authorities enforcing an EAW from Italy. It was unclear whether Arapi would be able to secure a retrial, but it was likely he would be held on remand for years awaiting the outcome of such an application. The EAW was granted by the English courts in 2010. On the day of Arapi’s appeal

to the High Court, Italian authorities agreed to withdraw the EAW. But it was only after extensive lobbying efforts by NGOs that the Italian authorities admitted they had sought Arapi in error. 9 or is hiding the contents of her knowledge from the court. she is either being naive or sadistic. re the french tradtiion where prosecutors call themselves judges---who 1958 CAMBODIA JA makes the funniest face and batts his eyes in disbelief clare is aspiring to SO WHAT?---left over from the left--- my case is so what (email me yr notes arran) ex hypothecae impartial adjudication exported from abroad clare---general---request surrender decision must be recognized almost prop---jurisdiction if being convicted or remanded in custody the recog nothing shocking of human rights norms the issues raised by weapons lobbyist for BAE india DAVID CAMERON to suppress ECHR human rights v. extradition to torture very very pert to this case see http:// domestic law problems electronic page 50 possibility of the scheme suspending the prosecution thus effectively stay in the country he found himself then hard copy 1017 under art 17 a req to go b4 a ct hearing had to be in a court the peron must be brought before a court in ten days there are exceptions article 95 com prop find s way into framework decision the solicitor with assange and gareth who is he? assange speaks to brown haired assistant in grey suit article 18 a court in the executing state shall decide we have three pages "its just astonishing" @storysearcher it will give anyone whose is interested clare legislative process clare missed out terrorism ammendments nothing that ---re anxiety ---not a word a good deal of anxiety double criminality jen and KH and assistant are conferencing now copy over to a scribd doc courtroom is rustling--- mary rose lenore eng 5 6 circumlocutions but no wifi at supreme court UK v. assange miss rose so says clare montgomery about julian assange's amazing lawyer dinah rose. dinah rose was termed the best barrister here---by a supreme court staffer. clare montgomery resumes after lunch the prosecutor second from left page 30 parliamentary under secretary paragraph 45 without wanting to embarrass anyone on the ball the EU committee framework decision scrutiny extradition act scrutiny data november one in feb--2004 2002

not different parts on the act paragraph 66 on the ninth of january case judicial authority---second from left---court decision the english translation had been mistranslated---the original french test--framework decision when did he discover that are we to ignore that as a n unfort mistake---he asks clare what one has to deal with the framework dec----as anticipated to be doubted on the far left---whether it is a mistake---it is a view of ministerial thinking--parliament proceeded on zigzag thanked alexi for the FSI suit news they know perfectly well its now november 2002 the ansard provisions upon which weight is placed 2003 representations based on volume 14 green book flag124 electronic numbering it begins on 526 need more (proglaw) this is now november 2002 124 volume 14 (the math of law---rose call for harmonising the electronic law pagination----) internally seventeen arm akimbo (me) refers in paragraph 59 framework court decision issued by a magistrate to ensure UK courts be--clearly drawn to house's parliament paragraph 62 there will be no ability the conclusion that they agreed judicial functions that is the explicit request--hansard material think the bill is we have got it in the appendix in the form as described by the home affairs committee\precise stage introduced into the commons standing committee electronic page number 132 all those authorities he deals with a variety of requests amsterdam prosecutor van der holst

plain from that when the words judicial authority the govt are taking the view alteration courts and judges 1208 in hard copy english sense van der holst dutch warrant cases--JA making a funny face bust up laughing must read the dutch case--dutch v. french--the monkeys just walked into the courtroom. gorillas . . . from the green party stunning green suit on the friend of jennifer robinson very jackie kennedy matches my green purse she is the one who wore the white dress on julian's arm 13 july 2011 i do not know her name told KH i have it in the throat and ear infection coming on. if only working hard on the internet came with health care and a warm home!!!!!! clare sorting out numbers we are now in 2003 judicial---january to june G4S guantanamo torturers and extraordinary rendition torturers drove by the court htis morn they get mega olympics contracts. the minister lord bason mechanical 1334 second column notice 1344 crispness of language and certainty---lady judge (the only) clear government policy nothing here would allow a rule of obligation because over-riding obligation of the united kingdom is to give effect to the framework decision then if we fail we are in breach alderelli any lesser level of cooperation and in addition (vomit) necessary---it montagu sharpe portrait overhead-- by spenser watson mance---parliamentary will must prevail prosecutors to issue warrants. supreme court UK motto on glass walls separating the gorillas from the other gorillas at the Supreme Court Monkey court trouble is i think these judges are too smart for montgomery's tricks, but she will still get paid. MOTTO

i will do right to all manner of people without fear of favor affection or ill will i will do right to all manner of people after the laws and sages of this realm eng, mary rose lenore 7 issue of a speedy trial dinah rose now into one quarter of her time for response ECHR individual liberty article 5 one of hte convention ms montgomery she misses the point that it is identical synonymous article 1 5 3 this is a case of states legislating in the field on the restrictions on human liberty 51c of the convention dinah european c of h rts my learned friend does not grapple with---dinah on clare clare pets her hair with left hand clare drinks water clares pen is blue in those authorities braingarbage: there is no justice in england my learned friend=clare montgomery dinah refers to clare so--- yet clare calls her miss rose. core constitutional document infer european document of human rights recognition by council of europe (the european confederation of clientstates says USAcentric braingarbage) independence from the executive and the parties ECHR separation of powers nemo judex rule shisa? autonomous pan-european meaning kundalini pertains to judicial process those authorities who could be regarded as judicial authorities any body-- drains the concept of substantive content or limit--- it is not something down to the member states what are the edges we say she doesnt need to simple clear echr apertaining to ther judicial process---anyone pertaining ministry of justice department of justice torture memo see disbartorturelawyers this is a scheme which intended to be clear and effic ient for member states req to look at particular function being formed decide if it is to be legal or political by political beethoven 5th the ECHR has gone for an approach of independednce for th ekey characteristic for other forms of power-- -- doomed exercize two points in conducting investigation the ECHR in rel to swedish prosecutor independence from the executive and from the parties--- see fredrik reinfeldt's prejudicing the media climate we offer a principled and --- the next objection---inconsistent---absolutely clear--- gvt departments not to be included see framework decision---- each member state authority clear there is a complete break government minister the only role which is to be played is to assist in the administrative decision cycle nine finds its flesh in article seven the council itself has expressed criticism of ---states executives to isssue and execute warrants the council report vol 12 tab 100 chrome dies tmobile dongle dies change to safari save data miss some words abrogate 96 convention why the abolition of nationals 1996 convention---period of five years---my friend--clare--- you will see that that permitted states not for a period five years benny lux convention tab one 57 infact extradition regime to nationals extended----ruled unconstitutional in germany clare has her green binder dinah goes on----difficulty in poland and in germany the national courts said unconstitutional---unless accomp by better protections---mance state to state transfer hu8uman trafficking significanct ways to ease commerce in persons thru

US states---the nordic agreement particularly ---backing warrants---the kingdom of ireland---- this would lead to particular issues of trust and need for safeguards A JUDICIAL AUTHORITY (in UK islamic man syed contained for 5 yrs no trial and olympic and guantanamo prison G4s extraordinary rendition scandal---) shengen information system---allowed police to request an alert---by 212 section UK has implemented she has wholly misinterpreted the shengen section\ when you look at this document what it shows is green paper not failed article 86 treaty of lisbon---introduced--- a range of different--degree severity consequences article 39 cross border cooperation scandal surveillance request for assistance an authority designated by authorities jetstream thom yorke this is a ghost coach--which way you going---over the cliffs of dover--- the scream---munch david kelly assasination FSI suit of assange is good news hope it keeps him in england (on earth) and from being assasinated requests for assistance clear by virtue of sub-paragraph 2 then at article 95 data on persons wanted for arrest ----spy files context of jud auth---is to be contrasted with police---min of just (DOJ torture memo) and prosecutor information for extradition all section 212 does---nothing to do with broadening---diff one article 95 the alert is issued at the request of a judicial authority (so why did swedish police leak it to the press??? karl rove prime PR) alert at request of the authority simply saying it includes at the request of----thats all its doing my learned friend sought to rely on the nordic treaty not subsumed by 2003 framework the nordic countries said it should continue on the basis that it was wider in scope than 2003 pursuant to article 31-2 sweden says---uniform extended and enlarged fascilitate---teh nordic agreement extends to give police power for extradition--subsequent instruments--- abrogation of dual criminality now we have passed her hour allotted after clare ate her time up dinah rose proceeds with subsequent instruments they cannot be a guide instruments contain extended all the instruments she relies on--- issuing authority---prosecutors included page one five i dotn have time to deal with it all clare says: you dont need to be worrried about all the people issuing these----bc its a requirement that a judge is underlying a warrant she relies on--- see article one content and form realize i am a mong the vie that can observe JA face---due to the slant of the first row seat on the far left by jim curran--first obvious difficulty---permits EAW provided there is a domestic arrest warrant----so how does she get to the position--bc or other enforcable judicial decision---a remarkable admission for my learned friend to make--so respectful wholely inconsistent with her case---- the very thing htat would defeat her case van der hoth decision has wholly misinterpreted that decision--knives out under the 1870 act--if state req were ---

authorities vol 3 tab 27 2573 internal numbering---the section 1870 extradition act---warrant---BG: so instead of arresting david kelly to extradite to USA he was killed in england--harrowdown hill-dinah rose: inclusive accused signed by a warrant lord kerr's point again. alternative decision rapid check of the evaluation reports would be required in the netherlands--- tab 95 hard copy page seven---4451 the decision to issue---paragraph 3.1 any prosecutor may issue an EAW provided prereq domestic page seven netherlands dont get an arrest warrant from a judge--- to sugggest in every state observation about the propriety of the netherlands process---(sociologically impossible to report or whistleblow GVT) passage sweden passage expert evidence the prosecutor had to be arrest warrant---from a court--simply MANCE: it might mean from a heirarchical superior the nordic scheme----supplemental swedish legislation without expert evidence the execution of warrants received from other states---- arequest for extrdt must be made prosecutor gen another prosecutor if does not consent based on--- slaughter nordic agreement see you in strasbourg clare: says crystal clear---swedish law---jumps in that appellant should be arrested---that marries up---with paragraph 21 prosecutor---intended--before any court order for detention---what do you say about the evaluation report----says far left guy---about clare's interjection rose says its cobbled together it is not clear whether it is in swede the reason my learned friend clare does not look happy looking down and away and to the left---now up chin up and to the left folding arms dinah---safeguard---framework decision---to european framework---seems italian legislation concerned about---short of time simply wrong to suggest that a judge could ignore proportionality the discretion not simply a breach of article 5 but also article 8 plainly relevant SO HAPPY FOT THIS LEGAL EDUCATION dinah rose article 34 the business of war crimes trials when can the wikileaks courts open? e-evidence for millenia--in cablegate et al leaks commission remaining imperfectiosn national parlimentarians complain no legal incommunicado nonuniform proportionality check in the absense of test for minor offenses ARE EUROPEAN HUMAN RIGHTS standards being met across the EU? ask dominic raab and david cameron international law hit men no pepper spray all the judges poker faces sweden 10 minutes more i'm very grateful legislative process without material alteration it wont survive the particularly absence of article three she has sought to say there were requirements jud decision by jud auth arrest warrant described as a request. money. its all about money. how much is assange worth. how much can the UK make off this. cypress case extremely superficial ananda type approach isssues cavassed by this court that again provisions of italian law---domestic legislative by my lord lord mance i felt concerned for the bill of rights that the minister was when making that assurance promoting a bill for pepper andhart to be satisfied the home affairs select committee bill did not contain judicial

following deabte in the house of commons that course of events the word judicial was intended as a check---- independent safeguard. grateful to counsel reserve jmnt MARY ROSE LENORE ENG SUPREME COURT UK 2 FEBRUARY 2012 tweet addendums braingarbage braingarbage circumlocutions but no wifi at supreme court UK v. assange c..jasup assange wikileaks ### 56 seconds ago Favorite Reply Delete 13 minutes ago # 15 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage braingarbage prataomdet braingarbage braingarbage convey to # primegate the efforts to destroy wikileaks are going so-so at disbartorturelawyers jasup assange wikileaks supreme courtUK # #### 15 minutes ago #### 16 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage however, i appreciate your legal brainhackery as a feat of neocon propaganda disbartorturelawyers jasup assange wikileaks braingarbage braingarbage an arrest and extradition of a human being to a country which tortures is far more serious than a telephone interception clare montgomery 17 minutes ago 19 minutes ago

#### braingarbage braingarbage that really hurt my brain disbartorturelawyers jasup assange wikileaks braingarbage braingarbage he looks down disbartorturelawyers jasup assange wikileaks 19 minutes ago 19 minutes ago #### #### braingarbage braingarbage the spy files argument w/clare montgomery equivocates person of assange with a phone hack disbartorturelawyers jasup assange wikileaks braingarbage braingarbage "european instruments" with clare montgomery does she mean g4s torture renditions? disbartorturelawyers jasup assange wikileaks #### 20 minutes ago # 24 minutes ago #### braingarbage braingarbage does anyone else feel vexed? jasup i'm trying a massive blink flurry to contain my angst at clare montgomery's time wasting braingarbage braingarbage disbartorturelawyers jasup of member states assange wikileaks

bottom half reference to the law 27 minutes ago 27 minutes ago #### braingarbage braingarbage supreme court decision disbartorturelawyers montgomery 6044 jasup assange wikileaks clare braingarbage braingarbage judge gets with clare "we've never seen it" she shakes her head disbartorturelawyers jasup assange wikileaks ananda #### 28 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage how can this obscuration of facts masquerade as law in england #disbartorturelawyers #jasup #assange #wikileaks clare on german law now 30 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage disbar attys supporting extradition to 28658374/A... disbar clare montgomery #disbartorturelawyers #jasup #assange #wikileaks 31 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage we are the international law community #jasup #assange #wikileaks 34 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage #ACLU #interrogation #Torture #jasup #assange #wikileaks #CIA #ABUGHRAIB #arab #collateralmurder #disbartorturelawyers 35 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage #interrogation #Torture #jasup #assange #wikileaks #CIA #ABUGHRAIB #arab #collateralmurder #disbartorturelawyers 36 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage #DOJ #interrogation #Torture #jasup #assange #wikileaks #CIA#torturehttp:// 38 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage my lord and my lady #jasup #assange #wikileaks #CIA #torturememo 39 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage black sites #torture #jasup #assange #wikileaks #CIA #torture 40 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage arrogated 40 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage #jasup #assange #wikileaks #CIA #torture memo 41 minutes ago

braingarbage braingarbage see notes from extradition to torture debate at hero! #jasup #assange #wikileaks 42 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage #jasup #assange #wikileaks feeling like a law ninja for wikileaks!!!! 43 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage from me 43 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage latin wont hide your lack of content #jasup #assange #wikileaksclare montgomery 44 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage contra legend test clear obscuring a nonstatement with latin to demand clear language #jasup #assange #wikileaks clare montgomery 44 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage legal white phosphorus #jasup #assange #wikileaks #fallujah 47 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage does clare montgomery pile numbers + dutch law commentary to obfuscate the deportation to torture commissioned by sweden? #jasup #wikileaks 47 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage disbar torture lawyers: disbar lawyers who support torture, deportation to torture #jasup #wikileaks #assange clare? 49 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage larger context is defending extraordinary rendition, refoulement, deportations, and secret prisons for torture #jasup #wikileaks #assange 50 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage #jasup #wikileaks #assange notes after lunch clare v. julian 51 minutes ago braingarbage braingarbage neat graphic noisebridge 2 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage solidarity statement from #occupylondon to amazing #assangelawyer dinah rose #jasup #wikileaks 2 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage braingarbage: julian assange of wikileaks supreme court uk day notes #jasup #assange #wikileaks 2 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage braingarbage: clare montgomery versus julian assange: minutes da... #jasup #assange #wikileaks 2 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage autonomous #jasup someone is showing his teeth at the #assangetrial 2 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage or does she know? 2 hours ago An0nylulz Anonymous Is #Facebook sharing your face with law enforcement agencies? 249162... #facialrecognition #photoDNA 14 hours ago Retweeted by braingarbage

braingarbage braingarbage benefit for the post 911 islamophobic extradition and indefinite detention racket is immense #humantrafficking #jasup #assange #wikileaks 2 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage does clare montgomery work for CIA or Karl Rove. or more accurately is it covert or overt? #jasup 2 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage he did work on the swedish weapons industry versus #assangeread it here: #jasup #wikileaksdefense network 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage i phoned kevin zeese---told him i was putting these docs on scribd 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage there were CIA memos and the torture doctrine gained under ACLU FOIA 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage disbar torture lawyers disbarment complaints for torture lawyers and bush 6---i was reading when #collateralmurder came out spring 2010 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage thankfully into digital satygraha the national lawyers guild expression for #anonymous equally applies to #wikileaks and #TPB pirate bay 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage the first time i read CIA torture memos i wanted to throw my computer across a bus. imagine how i feel now at #jasup #assange #wikileaks 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage proportionality check made elsewhere? #ICC #ECHR delusional trust of mafia police states----this is not her forte--clare montgomery #jasup 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage clare's solicitor has looked at me twice when she drops ball#assange #jasup #wikileaks 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage funny also using tmobile internet dongle due to the fact that the supreme court is not adequate internet for #assange #jasup #wikileaks 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage how funny then that clare seems ignorant of the MP debate on extradition crisis for human rights #jasup #assange #wikileaks 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage if anyone has read wikileaks cables they will know that trusting other nations judicial systems is spurious #jasup #assange #wikileaks 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage WOW: mance on polish justice: rose objects to material not submitted watch rose face #jasup #assange #wikileaks 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage funny: assange face when clare montgomery mentions cambodia legal system inspired by french model #jasup #assange #wikileaks 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage 28 seats available in supreme court---worth the five am arrival to wait in freezing cold #jasup #wikileaks #assange 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage judicial authority epithet clare montgomery #jasup 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage notes #jasup #assange #wikileaks

3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage notes typed by my friend@arranedmonstone of @occupymediacoalition #jasup #assange #wikileaks 3 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage @ @RobertPEdwards hey nice to meet you! thanks for tweeting #JA #jsup #assange @wikileaks 4 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage in session #assange #wikileaks #jasup notes at braingarbage soon 4 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage not sure of my theories 7 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage spoke to x who says she rode in a taxi with johannes wahlstrom last year with belmarsh hearing 7 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage singing and dancing "wouldn't it be lovely" in a guy fawkes mask outside the supreme court UK where julian #assange of #wikileaks #jasup 7 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage similarity between treatment of #wikileaks and famous anti-evolution american scopes monkey trial (mutatis mutandis) notes@arranedmonstone 7 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage maintain hardline #kopimi TPB founder heart peter sunde @brokep vegan fighter #TPB 4ever maintain hardline kopimi 20 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage amazing talking with @wl_central gena mason about her awesome law program:nuremberg, administrative+++ . . .bringing #wikileaks to the USA 20 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage "by changing those things which need to be changed" #wikileaks mutatis mutandis 21 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage @ @Liberte_info notes, a few pics and two cool 2012/02/ thanks for the love #jasup #wikileaks4ever 21 hours ago Cleonarda68 Cleonarda da Venezia #Assange lawyer Dinah Rose was absolutely incredible, I'm so impressed! Let's see what's tomorrow bring with Montgomery #jasup 21 hours ago Retweeted by braingarbage braingarbage braingarbage Pirate Bay Founders Lose Supreme Court Appeal, Going to via @Techland twisted #TPB sweden supreme court@anakata 21 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage i like this video a lot of JA leaving supreme court! really happy vibe today! thanks to all the #jasup and 21 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage hey #occupylondon #wikileaks is kicking it at the supreme court over at westminster tomorrow. confetti? masks? #anonymous #occupylsx 21 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage "one of the best silks across the Bar as a whole" truly in awe of dinah rose!!! #jasup #wikileaks #assange amazing law! 21 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage hope

hope.h..."everything she does turns to rose" for Dinah Rose for #jasup great day at supreme court #wikileaks #assange 21 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage a few pics and vids Julian Assange of Wikileaks leaves UK Supreme #jasup #wikileaks #assange #wljul great day! 22 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage really happy about today! footage #assange of #wikileaks today at the UK supreme court #jasup it was a great day! 22 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage DINAH ROSE is the name of the barrister who rocked #assange of #wikileaks case today at the UK supreme court 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage #wikileaks #jasup #assange part 3 notes 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage hit my notes! sorry for typos! #wlsup #wikileaks #assange 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage worry she is dropping the ball for the dark side? #wlsup #wikileaks #assange really overshadowed by assange's excellent new barrister! 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage claire montgomery "extradition in its proper form" + extraordinary rendition g4s style? #assange of #wikileaks #jasup supreme court UK 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage england needs functional microphones for proper freedom of information and access #assange of #wikileaks #jasup supreme court Uk 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage audio is flipping on and off with claire montgomery #assange of #wikileaks #jasup weakening her delivery supreme court Uk 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage minutes after lunch #assange of #wikileaks 80119238/A... 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage "not in this country" says judge #assange of #wikileaks #jasup re EAW 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage montgomery now speaking in supreme court against #assange of #wikileaks feel shift: a criminological authoritarian police approach #jasup 23 hours ago braingarbage braingarbage #occupylondon confirmed the livestream of the car driving into humans 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage #occupylondon reports EDL police punched woman in face and that spinning saw was wielded into a crowd 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage humans look more alive after lunch at UK Supreme #jasup #assange #wikileaks

#wljul 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage i applaud the greater degree of dignity and infrastructure here at UK Supreme #jasup #assange #wikileaks #wljul 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage charlie veitch showed up to call the Uk supreme court a "mickey mouse court" #jasup #assange #wikileaks #wljul #lovepolice 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage #occupylondon came to check out #jasup #assange #wikileaks #wljul updated me on the power flux and conflicting rumors; glad to see JA 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage loaned converter to #wl_central #jasup #assange #wikileaks #wljul 1 Feb PartiPirate PartiPirate #WikiLeaks chercherait un moyen d'héberger ses serveurs off shore via @Korben 1 Feb Retweeted by braingarbage braingarbage braingarbage minutes for #jasup #assange at supreme court points of international /european law relating to extradition #wikileaks 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage #wlsup #assange #wikileaks #jasup #wljul more fun to hear the future of #wikileaks generated international law warcrimes ecodestruction 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage find it funny that the #wlsup #assange #wikileaks supporting #jasup #wljul crowd tries to censor my blog!!! open information + human rights 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage gena mason from @wl_central good footage last night when she interviewed + filmed #wlsup #assange #wikileaks #jasup #wljul 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage taking mad notes #assange #wikileaks supreme court look at extraditions and the european arrest warrant #jasup #wljul 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage ireland was the historical change in UK extradition law UK #assange#wikileaks #jasup #wljul 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage ireland re extradition liberalization for anti-extradition UK #assange #wikileaks #jasup #wljul 1 Feb braingarbage braingarbage supreme court has great audio---unlike the royal courts. jasup nice to not have to strain for the mumblings wikileaks wljul assange ### # 1 Feb 1 Feb # 1 Feb 1 Feb

28 Sep 10 Retweeted by braingarbage braingarbage braingarbage super hungry at jasup lawyer is kicking it for calm approach. wikileaks wljul assange she has a very compellingly ## ## braingarbage braingarbage in supreme court listening to wlsup assange 's rocked she-lawyer supremecourtuk ## # braingarbage braingarbage jacob rees mogg ends male domination of UK Parliament zatzi i'm still in love with your brother anakata GottfridSW Thank God for Twitter. I almost missed my own trial! spectrial

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful

Master Your Semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master Your Semester with a Special Offer from Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.