International leaders have condemned Ecuador after police in the country's capital broke into the Mexican Embassy on Friday to arrest a former vice president who had been granted political asylum.

International leaders have condemned Ecuador after police in the country’s capital broke into the Mexican Embassy to arrest a former vice president who had been granted political asylum.

The raid late Friday prompted Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador to break off diplomatic relations with Ecuador, while his government’s foreign relations secretary said the move will be challenged at the World Court in The Hague.

Police broke through the external doors of the embassy in Quito to arrest Jorge Glas, who had been residing there since December. He had sought asylum after being indicted on corruption charges and it had been granted hours earlier.

The break-in was widely condemned.

The Organization of American States in a statement reminded its members, which include Ecuador and Mexico, of their obligation not to “invoke norms of domestic law to justify non-compliance with their international obligations.”

  • eardonEnglish
    34·
    8 months ago

    I don’t really have sympathy for mexico’s government officials.

    Aren’t most of them in bed with cartels that rape and murder children?

  • Oisteink@feddit.nlEnglish
    330·
    8 months ago

    Oh no! The repercussions!!

    I’m a bit uneasy on how this system works. Are there no consequences for allowing fugitives to escape a country? Why should a country respect another country’s embassy borders if they accept fugitives?

    I’m not sure about this, but I think this is all that will come of this, and it might be ok

    • Cochise@lemmy.eco.brEnglish
      141·
      8 months ago

      He get asylum because Mexico authorities see his charges as political persecution. There is a trend in Latin America of bogus corruption’s trials against left wing politicians, as Lula, Kirchner and Morales cases show.

      Always remember that the tribunals are not that just and independent at all, and condemnations can be made up.

    • The Uncanny Observer@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      152·
      8 months ago

      That’s a good question. I think we should consider it closely. Say the United States invaded Russia to arrest Edward Snowden, you would support that? Because it’s the same thing. That embassy is sovereign Mexican territory. That’s how embassies work. Them raiding it is legally no different than them invading Mexico with an armed force.

      • Oisteink@feddit.nlEnglish
        32·
        8 months ago

        I get that international law states this, but I’m not sure it works the same in real life. Will be interesting to see if Mexico answers to the invasion of their country with more than words.

        • BreakDecks@lemmy.mlEnglish
          7·
          8 months ago

          Making an exception to international law for “real life” is just violating international law…

          There are consequences for doing that, such as none of your allies ever trusting you again.

          • Oisteink@feddit.nlEnglish
            32·
            8 months ago

            Yeah - it’s gonna be real harsh for them going forward now. Unlike Russia and Israel, who both seem to handle breaking international law without dire consequences

            Edit: typos

        • Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldEnglish
          43·
          8 months ago

          Actually it’s a breech of international law more than anything. A cause for war is a bridge too far.

      • Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldEnglish
        33·
        8 months ago

        An invading country can and most often does arrest offenders. It’s not the same thing.

    • Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldEnglish
      122·
      8 months ago

      Had he had a warrant for his arrest, he wouldn’t have been granted asylum. There was only a warrant issued after asylum had been granted. It’s comparable to Assange, but instead of the British waiting him out the Ecuadorians decided to storm the embassy

      • NomecksEnglish
        2·
        8 months ago

        The US damn sure would. Osama Bin Laden, for example

        • NoIWontPickAName@kbin.earth
          2·
          8 months ago

          1. I didn’t agree with us invading Afghanistan to look for a bunch of saudis that were hiding in Pakistan.

          2. Are this guys crimes on the equivalent of leading a terrorist attack? Aren’t they corruption charges?

          Sorry Central and South America all just started popping off in the last few years and especially in the last year so I might be getting confused here

      • Oisteink@feddit.nlEnglish
        1·
        8 months ago

        I’m not the type to invade anything, so no.

        I’m not saying it’s an ok move to make, but in this world today this isn’t what I think are big violations of international law. And I don’t think much will come from it