The Pakistan courts are refusing to let an American diplomat leave the country.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-44094872

Given what Trump thinks of the countries government and the monies wasted there what will he do?

"Pakistan has prevented a US diplomat from leaving the country after he
allegedly killed a motorcyclist by driving through a red light last month."

WIederling wrote:

"Pakistan has prevented a US diplomat from leaving the country after he
allegedly killed a motorcyclist by driving through a red light last month."

If he has a diplomatic passport, then Pakistan has no right to detain him.

As much as I dislike the concept of anyone being above the law of the land, if countries don't respect the rules of diplomacy, we might as well all go home. In a perfect World, the US would allow him to face the rule of law (if indeed what is alleged actually happened), but it won't. Money will change hands and that will be the end of it.

In the UK, we're horribly familiar with the concept of diplomats literally getting away with murder.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Yvonne_Fletcher

scbriml wrote:

WIederling wrote:

"Pakistan has prevented a US diplomat from leaving the country after he
allegedly killed a motorcyclist by driving through a red light last month."

If he has a diplomatic passport, then Pakistan has no right to detain him.

As much as I dislike the concept of anyone being above the law of the land, if countries don't respect the rules of diplomacy, we might as well all go home. In a perfect World, the US would allow him to face the rule of law (if indeed what is alleged actually happened), but it won't. Money will change hands and that will be the end of it.

In the UK, we're horribly familiar with the concept of diplomats literally getting away with murder.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Yvonne_Fletcher

From the same bbc newsbyte:
"On Friday, the IHC had ruled Col Hall does not have absolute immunity. "

No idea how they get there.
I suppose Pakistan like some other countries are a bit fed up with having
a foreign nation under "diplomatic immunity" sow dissent, bank role clandestine ops
and further corruption widely.
Remember: Pakistan is the country where the CIA faked a vaccination campaign:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/ ... ladens-dna
( in an environment of preexisting rural mistrust this has created longstanding echoes )

scbriml wrote:

WIederling wrote:

"Pakistan has prevented a US diplomat from leaving the country after he
allegedly killed a motorcyclist by driving through a red light last month."

If he has a diplomatic passport, then Pakistan has no right to detain him.

As much as I dislike the concept of anyone being above the law of the land, if countries don't respect the rules of diplomacy, we might as well all go home. In a perfect World, the US would allow him to face the rule of law (if indeed what is alleged actually happened), but it won't. Money will change hands and that will be the end of it.

In the UK, we're horribly familiar with the concept of diplomats literally getting away with murder.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Yvonne_Fletcher

True, in the basis the diplomatic immunity is a good concept and necessary, there are some downsides to this, from traffic violations by diplomats whom they don't care about to assault and abuse or even murder. If a rogue nation decides that their diplomate is more important then what they did, then that's it indeed, or expel the diplomate.

The Dutch incident with a Russian diplomate ended with the Dutch actually apologizing to Russia and the diplomate could stay, nothing from the Russian side either.

The incident: Dutch police officers were called to a scene where a car ramped several parked cars, on the scene they saw children being mistreated. They arrested the Russian Diplomate Dmitri Borodin. The children were the Russian children of the diplomate and the driver of the car was the wife of Borodin. Russian side only demanded an apology.

In Dutch: https://denhaagfm.nl/2013/10/09/agenten ... diplomaat/

A few days later, in a totally unrelated incident, of course, a Dutch diplomat was attacked in his home, his home vandalized and he was beaten up. even though within his apartment complex there was a janitor whom conveniently didn't see anything.

These are the downsides of diplomatic immunity, especially for these Russian children in this case. The Dutch should have apologized for breaking the treaty and expelled this diplomate.

I think that it is fair to at least hold diplomats until a trial has been completed. Those of us in the West are sick of Saudi Princes (et al) doing disgusting acts and walking away without any consequences, so our own diplomatic staff should also be held to high standards. In Wellington a Malaysian diplomat raped someone but left before he faced any consequences. It's disgusting when they can truthfully say that they weren't convicted of anything.

Let them be tried and then extradited once the trial is complete.

scbriml wrote:

WIederling wrote:

"Pakistan has prevented a US diplomat from leaving the country after he
allegedly killed a motorcyclist by driving through a red light last month."

If he has a diplomatic passport, then Pakistan has no right to detain him.

Funny that you are insisting on diplomatic protocol in this case, but defend your government declared intend to violate said protocol if they get the chance to without breaching a certain embassy.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Funny that you are insisting on diplomatic protocol in this case, but defend your government declared intend to violate said protocol if they get the chance to without breaching a certain embassy.

I'm not insisting on anything - all I said was if he has a diplomatic passport then Pakistan should not detain him.

I assume you're trying, and failing as usual, to equate this to a certain person currently hiding (of his own choice) in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London? Threatening something and actually doing it are two entirely different things. Even you can see that, Tommy. Please try harder next time!

tommy1808 wrote:

scbriml wrote:

WIederling wrote:

"Pakistan has prevented a US diplomat from leaving the country after he
allegedly killed a motorcyclist by driving through a red light last month."

If he has a diplomatic passport, then Pakistan has no right to detain him.

Funny that you are insisting on diplomatic protocol in this case, but defend your government declared intend to violate said protocol if they get the chance to without breaching a certain embassy.

Best regards
Thomas

What protocol would that be? Assange doesn't have diplomatic immunity, it has to be accepted and granted by the UK government prior to the diplomat arriving in the country, Ecuador cannot unilaterally grant immunity on its own say so.