Dear runner,

The question is not whether the Swedish courts are fair. They may be quite fair according to their standards. However, whether Assange gets tried under those courts is questionable. The worry is that Sweden will turn Assange over to the US whereas we can feel fairly sure that England won't.

Dear runner,

Take a look at the following website:

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3354730.htm

Geoffrey Robertson tells us that the warrant for Assange's
extradition was signed by an ambitious prosecutor out to
make a name for himself.
And that is the point that Robertson is making - he's
questioning the legality of something that comes from a
biased prosecutor. The Courts in Sweden for "rape" trials
are held in secret. There is no jury - merely judges -
and - Robertson claims that Assange will definitely not
receive a fair trial. Read the link for yourself.

Lexi

So you don't trust the Dutch courts?

Dear runner,

Did you not read what Geoffrey Robertson
had to say on Lateline?

Lexi,

Geoffrey Robertson makes the Swedish system sound like a kangaroo court where it is far from so.

The court is based on the Roman Dutch system of a Judge and 2 assessors. The assessors are required to have a legal background in the matter at hand, but can be civilians, and can be disqualified if shown to have any particular prejudice. In many cases it can be argued that this is better than the judge and jury system we have. Similarly prosecutors have different powers to what they have here.

To assume that their legal system is flawed is somewhat parochial.

Dear SM,

From my understanding - Geoffrey Robertson was more
critical of the prosecutor's agenda and the warrant
that he's issued and his motives in pursuing
Assange. And the legality of it all - coming from
an individual rather than the Courts themselves.
I surmise that Robertson feels that the deck would
be stacked against Assange - and that he would not
get a fair hearing in this case. And it's this case
that is of concern to Robertson.