absentia

The protection of not having a trial in absentia, making it illegal, is so that the punishment is just.

The problem is how that trial would be conducted in absentia would have been a farce.

A default judgement obtained in absentia also means the judge has no leverage to pry this sort of information out of the company's representatives.

Why does it matter if some hypothetical founder In absentia is making more than you or not?

Because the Yemeni government tried him in absentia and ordered him to be captured dead or alive.

This would all be a moot point if there had been a trial held (even in absentia).

Then legally strip him of his citizenship -- such a thing certainly can be done in absentia.

Edit: Reading another source suggests they can charge him in absentia, so the statute of limitations argument is probably moot.

People have made a career off of this decade long witch hunt with their international kangaroo court trying people in absentia.

Swedish courts can, and have, charged people in absentia, so that argument does not hold.

There have been legal precedents in people declared dead in absentia for centuries (e.g.

It's not as if Assange has a right to be charged in absentia.

Three other journalists who were tried in absentia were handed 10-year sentences." All for supposedly 'spreading false news'...

The president illegally removed himself from the country, rendering the government inoperable - no bill could be signed into law by him "in absentia".

Also, I don't know if that applies to all crimes or just to rape, but I find it rather funny that he cannot by persecuted "in absentia".

Trying someone in absentia is a rather unusual measure, and I'm surprised that you'd like Sweden to do this, given your concern that the case be handled in the "ordinary" fashion.