>This is an unprecedented, essentially imperialist, violation of national
>sovereignty, that a head of state of a country could be held accountable
>for alleged crimes of torture years after he has left office, and happens
>to be travelling for medical treatment to another country. (Of course it
>will not do much good for the profitability of private medical clinics in
>London - but this is not the main consideration.)
>
>This would appear to imply that any head of state in future might find
>themselves vulnerable to arrest on the grounds of crimes against humanity.
>Where will it end?
With any luck, Chris, it'll end with Pinochet being topped and a lot of thoughtful expressions on the faces of his would-be emulators!
How wonderful if all such murderers-under-color-of-law paid for their crimes! People are not mere unfeeling automata, to be disposed of at the whim of a dictator or his murderous agents.
le meas, Margaret