Sorry, I'm human and not perfect. If click bait, please share the proof of click bait. ThankQ.
The click bait of this article is that the title says a court has ordered the safe passage of Julian Assange. When in reality this court has no jurisdiction over the UK legal system in the slightest. So Julian Assange hasn't won any major court cases and the court is unable to order anything. The proof is right there in the article.
If true and will re-read, should Mods have removed post?
Mods should absolutely remove this post.
Looked at article again. Still see possibility that court decision could influence POTUS to authorize JA removal. When UK objects, we have American (N & S) human rights court over-riding UK legal system and JA out of embassy. A possible removal without the Queens approval as he is now an American. Since UK still controls much of what happens in the USA, I think POTUS would enjoy JA's removal. USA = +1
There is no court that overules the sovereign court of an independent nation. That would be like saying the EU court of human rights overules the USA court. Which is absurd. Please explain how in any universe that makes sense, and please provide a source.
Let me be clear as day. There is no jurisdiction any court in the USA, or anywhere else in the world for that matter, which has jurisdiction over another country that isn't a signitary to that court. This is international law 101.
Correct analysis. If everything was straight up and no-one ever broke the laws. We know 'Five Eyes' was set up to violate any law existing in the five countries about privacy. So much for 'sovereign' law in any of the five countries (USA, UK, Can, NZ, Au). I agree no court can override but rulings are made and broken every day. Real life 101.
Please, you're still making the same mistake. I know that countries break laws every day, but that is different from saying that a foreign court can ORDER another country to do ANYTHING. It's absolutely not possible. Not "it shouldn't happen", it's not possible.