Lichtenstein vs. Germany: Slippery Slopes Abound

So for those of you who (apparently, like most of the blogosphere) have glazed over this little fiasco, check out the WSJ's solid summary of the situation here.

While the Journal does a very good job explaining the facts surrounding the controversy, they don't take it out a step further to consider the implications of, and myriad questions raised by German investigators' actions.

Is it now not only commonplace, but a widespread and acceptable method of obtaining information in an investigation to blatantly pay employees to steal from their employers? Are the tactics employed by German investigators against firms essentially owned by another sovereign nation right, in the legal, ethical, or even pragmatic sense of the word? Taking this one step further, I cannot help but wonder as to how widespread such practices are, and to what extent or magnitude they are practiced. The next question really though, is where does it end? One could very easily make the argument that such tactics amount to the very same espionage practiced by the KGB or CIA during the cold war, if not worse, since the perpetrators are open about their espionage, and yet still completely unapologetic, as if Germans are rubbing it in Lichtenstein's face.

I'm not exactly an expert in Euro-zone or Lichtenstein law, but there are many things going on here that suggests the truth of the matter might be more complicated than it seems on the surface. If all is as the Journal would have us believe, one might imagine Lichtenstein banks having more recourse against the employees who stole client data and attempted (sometimes successfully) to blackmail the Banks.

Any readers out there familiar with extradition or employment law in Eastern Europe?