Whatever one’s views on ‘matters Assange’ I find the statement attributed to William Hague as disingenuous:
“This is the United Kingdom fulfilling its obligations under the Extradition Act to Sweden, a close partner in so many ways, a fellow democracy in the European Union. It is as simple as that. Therefore to us it is a simple matter of carrying out our law, but as well as being simple it is something we must do. We absolutely must fulfil our obligations under the Extradition Act. Therefore we are determined to do so and we remain determined to do so despite the regrettable announcement that Ecuador has made today.” (Emphasis mine)
But it is not ‘our’ law; it is a law imposed by the UK”s membership of the European Union, one to which Parliament agreed – not that they had any choice in the matter. Should not any law which is effective within the UK not exist but with the agreement of the people – but I digress. I also take issue with the words ‘a fellow democracy’ – the definition of ‘democracy’ being subjective, as ‘Harrogate’ proves.
Were Ecuador to grant Assange an Ecuadoran passport and simultaneously grant him status as a diplomatic, however temporarily, what exactly could the UK government – on behalf of their masters in Brussels – actually do without contravening the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations (1961)?
Afterthought: Where William Hague is concerned one can but repeat: Leave a boy in charge……….