Remand pending charges is not indefinite detention, it is for fourteen days, count starting when you are remanded. It can be renewed, and each renewal needs a new court hearing. Of course it can be abused, but most systems can. I still consider it better than the bail system.

As far as I understand your position, it is that the world should just use identical processes as the UK and its former colonies. I have found this position among many supporters of Assange, and I find it rather focused on form over content. If you never had a Star Chamber, you won't find an act of parliament abolishing it, ie the Habeas Corpus Act. It could very well be that I have misunderstood your position, as I often find you hard to understand.

As far as your quote in the middle, I am uncertain what you are quoting.

In any case the process in Sweden hasn't changed. Prosecutor asks the court for a remand in absentia decision. If court grants remand, prosecutor issues European Arrest Warrant. The Uppsala court is quite clear in its statement that it finds that Assange is still suspected, and is still a flight risk. They only find differently than the Stockholm court because Assange is presently jailed and he wasn't then. I don't see how that constitutes any change in the process.