Okay, but how do you think this works? Boris Johnson having a word with the judge? The judiciary haven’t exactly shown much interest in pandering to Boris; see Brexit judgements over the last couple of years.
I think the judges are probably more interested in the global standing, power and leverage of the UK than Boris is and the Brexit rulings arguably reflect that too.
The UK government is about more than just Boris's ego.
I wouldn't speculate as to the exact mechanism as to how this ruling came about but to assume it came divorced from politics is naive, especially given the nature of the ruling.
> I think the judges are probably more interested in the global standing, power and leverage of the UK than Boris is
Really? I wouldn't assume that at all; it's very much not their job, and it's not unusual for the courts to cause the government significant trouble and embarrassment. A judge's job is to uphold the law, not to be a political actor. And the UK's judges, by and large, have a reasonably good reputation for sticking to it.
Whether it's their "job" or not it's exactly in line with their rulings. Whether it's taking gold from Venezuela, trying to prevent the Brexit train from going off the cliff or this, realpolitik is clearly never far from their mind.
If their job were to give out fair rulings they wouldn't pretend that Assange was a spy not a journalist and they wouldnt try to hold Venezuelan gold hostage by picking winners in a foreign election.
The UK needs more bargaining chips. Trade negotiations are heavily weighted against them right now.