February 11, 2018:
Democracy and sovereignty depend on us having sufficient time to mature facts on trial of @JulianAssange who revealed his custody case in active litigation via appeal to quash UK arrest warrant. Judicious verdict presupposes time, full info and its transparency to defense.
No stronger reason than need for discursive deliberation around issue of waiver of an arrest warrant whose mandate was recently nullified in the jurisdiction which enacted the chase. A reason of high humanitarian concern, raising tension ‘twixt statutory rights to life and free movement/empire.
If you’d like permanent freedom, consistent application of statutory right to liberty (@libertyhq) vital. Quite possible a court might hold that @JulianAssange never needed an arrest warrant and that there is a barrier to his right to life and free movement by unconstitutional actors.
Interesting issue is the secrecy of information as pertains to case prevents accumulation of evidence that may prove @JulianAssange innocent & stacking odds for a guilty verdict. Courts are for empowering facts. My theory lacks research, but it is informed by critical perspective.
A court ruling on @JulianAssange would also do well to acknowledge the evaluation of @ecuador that he is eligible for diplomatic immunity enjoyed by persons outstanding in global citizenship and diplomacy.
Because of exceptional ability in computing, cryptogram and publishing his freedom will no doubt substantially culturally benefit the United Kingdom and societies the world around. For @Number10gov to deny exceptional diplomatic ability would be prostration of legislature to DOJ.
Denial of waiver is contrary to main purposes of custody statute, to empower an innocent suspect’s reunion with society as quick and smooth as possible and defend the impartiality of judiciary from political interference.