US lawyers argue in UK court that it has the right to kidnap foreign nationals

[billyskank]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article2982640.ece

The basic gist is that US government lawyers argued in the UK Court of Appeals that foreign nationals can be kidnapped by the US government if suspected of a crime and will have no recourse in the US courts.

Apparently it relates to a 19th century law to do with bounty hunting.

On edit: I should make it more clear: they argue that foreign nationals may be kidnapped in their own countries and brought to the US, and this is fine under US law.

[NewJeffCT]

1. Of course - the US is the world's dictator you know

what we say goes.


:sarcasm:

[billyskank]

7. All I know is

my country signed an extradition treaty with yours, in 2003 that places no obligation on your government to show probable cause to believe that the subject of the request actually committed a crime. My government, however, does have to show probable cause. Presumably because US citizens have constitutional rights, though I do not.

The fact that my government signed such a one-sided treaty (without debate in parliament) shows that we are nothing more than a vassal state.

Statewatch on the matter:

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/jul/25ukus.htm

Here is the actual treaty (PDF):

http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/USExtradition_210503.pdf

The crucial text is on page 7:

3. In addition to the requirements in paragraph 2 of this Article, a request for extradition
of a person who is sought for prosecution shall be supported by:

(a) a copy of the warrant or order of arrest issued by a judge or other competent authority;
(b) a copy of the charging document, if any; and
(c) for requests to the United States, such information as would provide a reasonable basis to believe that the person sought committed the offense for which extradition is requested.

Notice that the requirement 3(c) does not apply to the requests made by the United States.

[laconicsax]

2. Didn't we kinda go to war with Britain over this about 200 years ago?

Only they were kidnapping our nationalized citizens and pressing them into service.

[billyskank]

4. I don't know

but congratulations on your 666th post. :hi:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

3. Do they feel the same about Iran's right to kidnap in the U.S.?

Not to mention Somalia's or Andorra's?

[billyskank]

5. You know

I have a feeling that they won't...

[truebrit71]

6. I have a sneaking hunch that the UK court will tell the US to go pound sand on this one...

...There are extradition treaties for a reason...don't like it? Tough.

There are PLENTY of Irish folks on the Eastern Seaboard that the Brits would LOVE to "invite involuntarily" to come to the UK for a quiet chat and a trial for supporting the IRA....

[billyskank]

9. Well...

given the extradition treaty we signed with the US in 2003, one wonders why they even needed to make this argument.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2463282&mesg_id=2463707

[ThomCat]

8. If this doesn't kill our reputation in international political circles

I don't know what will.

"We will grab your citizens out of your country and there's not a damne thing you or they can do about it. No court hearings, no need for evidence. They just disappear because we said so. So much for your claim to national sovereignty."

[billyskank]

10. It is indeed very worrying.

:(

[ThomCat]

11. And this means if any of us manage to escape

to a more civilized country at some point, we could always be brought back. :(

[L. Coyote]

12. Works both ways. Argentina can kidnap Bush Sr. and Kissinger, not?

George Bush Sr. May Face Charges: Conspiring to Kidnap and Murder Political Activists
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2459135

What delicious ironies this issue brings forth! After all, firstly, this issue came to the Supreme Court
after Bush Sr. promoted the kidnapping in Mexico, and the legality was upheld.

Secondly, kidnapped for kidnapping and torture! :rofl:

Oh, and his son has made "rendition" a global phenomena.

[suffragette]

13. Lord Justice Moses is one of the judges

named in the article.
That definitely caught my eye.

Hope the court slams the administration on this one. Torture, kidnapping, lies and war - NOT IN MY NAME, dammit!

[billyskank]

14. I have to admit though

I don't understand why this is being argued in UK court, even if it does concern British nationals. What could they do about it?

[suffragette]

15. From what I can see, this came up in the course of

arguing about his extradition.
The US had already attempted to circumvent Canadian extradition law earlier and , barely, been prevented. Sounds like Canada and the UK courts are making the point that the US can't just keep behaving like a rogue nation and should honor its agreements and other countries laws and process, to which the US is saying pffft.
I think they would much rather have just had this happen in secret, which it would have if not for the Canadian justice system, which stopped in the 1st time.
Found a link for that here: http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/observer/story.html?id=ec194110-1489-46b5-8ee4-04081f9c8a6a&p=1