Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Spring Fund Drive: Keep CounterPunch Afloat
CounterPunch is a lifeboat of sanity in today’s turbulent political seas. Please make a tax-deductible donation and help us continue to fight Trump and his enablers on both sides of the aisle. Every dollar counts!
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Assange in Limbo

In an article in 1988 published in the Law Society Gazette, the author Carl Islam explains, with some rigour, the basis of immunity afforded to diplomatic and consular premises in Britain. The subject seems dry, until you realise the serious implications it poses to individuals such as Julian Assange, who sought refuge in the Ecuadorean embassy in violation of his bail conditions.

Islam begins with the principle of inviolability.  “Inviolability guarantees the sanctity of diplomatic and consular premises.” Then, the warning.  “While it does not place premises about the law, anybody who remains on diplomatic or consular premises can take refuge from the law.”  Hence the need for changes to rectify such abuse.

The background to this change of heart and the need to embrace a qualification to such diplomatic immunities came in 1984.  The British establishment was shaken that year by the activities of the Libyan People’s Bureau, which saw the killing of Woman Police Constable Fletcher from shots fired from the Bureau’s premises.  Over the years, the LPB had been purportedly stockpiling weapons under the cover of immunity, ostensibly to deal with dissidents of the Gaddafi regime.  While these were deemed gross abuses of diplomatic privileges granted by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, the British found their hands tied.

The white paper of 1985 made it clear that the British authorities were keen on implementing a “firmer” policy on how the Vienna Convention was applied and “take administrative measures to deal with abuse of diplomatic premises and to limit the extent of mission premises in accordance with international law and practice.”  Hence the passage of the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987 which would remove the diplomatic status of premises that were being misused.  The Vienna Convention, while accepted as part of British law, is qualified as to the residence of the mission accepted in the country.

Ecuador’s foreign minister Ricardo Patino has been forceful about the stance on Assange and equally forceful towards the efforts being made by the British authorities to extract the Australian from the premises. “We are not a colony of Britain.” WikiLeaks has itself released a statement claiming that Assange’s rights to asylum are being compromised in this act of bullying.

The British response is both clever and sophistic – not so much to discredit the Ecuadorean mission as to discredit the premises the mission is being used for.  In June, the Foreign Office did accept the embassy as diplomatic territory.  As long as Assange was on the premises, he was “beyond the reach of police” (Guardian, Jun 20).  Citing the DCPA signals a change of approach, though the Ecuadoreans could hardly be surprised.  The Act grants the British government the power to determine the status of land for diplomatic and consular missions.  Importantly, it controls sites, locations and places where those embassies might be established.  Prior to the act’s passage, diplomatic missions might establish their premises in any part of the city, or allow premises to fall into decay, immune from the title aspirations of local authorities.

What are the options for Assange?  The fact that Assange is on Ecuadorean premises, as it were, does not, of its own, accord him immunity from interference.  Even if he was to be granted an Ecuadorean diplomatic passport, and become an Ecuadorean national, he would still not be beyond the reaches of British law.  The irony of that would be that he could hardly seek asylum in a place of which he was a national.  The second complicating feature of that would be that immunity from arrest is only applicable to diplomats accredited to the Court of St. James’s with the Foreign Office’s blessing.

Diplomatic immunity for consular missions has been previously revoked in spectacular fashion.  The U.S. embassy in Teheran was occupied in 1979-1980 under a wave of fundamentalist fervour with the blessing of the Ayatollah Khomeini.  The Vienna Convention became a mere piece of paper before the revolution.  But the assumption underlying such diplomatic missions is that an unwarranted entry onto their premises is tantamount to an act of aggression.  Sanctity is indispensable to good relations.  Again Patino’s comments are on point.  “If the measure announced in the British official communication is enacted, it will be interpreted by Ecuador as an unacceptable, unfriendly and hostile act and as an attempt against our sovereignty.  It would force us to respond.”

As this situation develops, it is clear, however, that Assange’s options are few and far between.  The question is how far the British authorities are willing to make the case that the Ecuador mission has abused its premises.  While it is true that Assange has violated his bail conditions, he is merely a suspect before charges that have not even been formally laid. The gravity of his offences hardly qualify as matters of terrorist import, and it would be questionable whether the DCPA is being appropriately used.  But that may well be something the local constabulary will disagree with.

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge.  He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

 

More articles by:

Binoy Kampmark was a Commonwealth Scholar at Selwyn College, Cambridge. He lectures at RMIT University, Melbourne. Email: bkampmark@gmail.com

May 22, 2018
Thomas Knapp
Yes, Virginia, There is a Deep State
Andrew Stewart
What the Providence Teachers’ Union Needs for a Win
Jimmy Centeno
Mexico’s First Presidential Debate: All against One
May 21, 2018
Ron Jacobs
Gina Haspell: She’s Certainly Qualified for the Job
Uri Avnery
The Day of Shame
Amitai Ben-Abba
Israel’s New Ideology of Genocide
Patrick Cockburn
Israel is at the Height of Its Power, But the Palestinians are Still There
Frank Stricker
Can We Finally Stop Worrying About Unemployment?
Binoy Kampmark
Royal Wedding Madness
Roy Morrison
Middle East War Clouds Gather
Edward Curtin
Gina Haspel and Pinocchio From Rome
Juana Carrasco Martin
The United States is a Country Addicted to Violence
Dean Baker
Wealth Inequality: It’s Not Clear What It Means
Robert Dodge
At the Brink of Nuclear War, Who Will Lead?
Vern Loomis
If I’m Lying, I’m Dying
Valerie Reynoso
How LBJ initiated the Military Coup in the Dominican Republic
Weekend Edition
May 18, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
The Donald, Vlad, and Bibi
Robert Fisk
How Long Will We Pretend Palestinians Aren’t People?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Wild at Heart: Keeping Up With Margie Kidder
Roger Harris
Venezuela on the Eve of Presidential Elections: The US Empire Isn’t Sitting by Idly
Michael Slager
Criminalizing Victims: the Fate of Honduran Refugees 
John Laforge
Don’t Call It an Explosion: Gaseous Ignition Events with Radioactive Waste
Carlo Filice
The First “Fake News” Story (or, What the Serpent Would Have Said)
Dave Lindorff
Israel Crosses a Line as IDF Snipers Murder Unarmed Protesters in the Ghetto of Gaza
Gary Leupp
The McCain Cult
Robert Fantina
What’s Wrong With the United States?
Jill Richardson
The Lesson I Learned Growing Up Jewish
David Orenstein
A Call to Secular Humanist Resistance
W. T. Whitney
The U.S. Role in Removing a Revolutionary and in Restoring War to Colombia
Rev. William Alberts
The Danger of Praying Truth to Power
Alan Macleod
A Primer on the Venezuelan Elections
John W. Whitehead
The Age of Petty Tyrannies
Franklin Lamb
Have Recent Events Sounded the Death Knell for Iran’s Regional Project?
Brian Saady
How the “Cocaine Mitch” Saga Deflected the Spotlight on Corruption
David Swanson
Tim Kaine’s War Scam Hits a Speed Bump
Norah Vawter
Pipeline Outrage is a Human Issue, Not a Political Issue
Mel Gurtov
Who’s to Blame If the US-North Korea Summit Isn’t Held?
Patrick Bobilin
When Outrage is Capital
Jessicah Pierre
The Moral Revolution America Needs
Binoy Kampmark
Big Dead Place: Remembering Antarctica
John Carroll Md
What Does It Mean to be a Physician Advocate in Haiti?
George Ochenski
Saving Sage Grouse: Another Collaborative Failure
Sam Husseini
To the US Government, Israel is, Again, Totally Off The Hook
Brian Wakamo
Sick of Shady Banks? Get a Loan from the Post Office!
Colin Todhunter
Dangerous Liaison: Industrial Agriculture and the Reductionist Mindset
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail