Whatever you may think of Assange, Wikileaks, or the alleged rapes, I don't like the precedent it sets. As I understand it, one tack taken by Assange's defense seems to be that a warrant issued by a public prosecutor is invalid. The Supreme Court says it is.
Well, maybe the European Arrest Warrant Act could be interpreted such that it allows this, but whether you are civil law or common law, a warrant is a permission to violate a innocent's (on the innocent until proven guilty principle) rights. Such power should never be given to the whims of a prosecutor, a man whose sworn duty, even in an inquisitorial system, is to find facts that will incriminate someone.
Horrible affirmative precedent to set...
|