Commentators

Showers (AM and PM) 12° London Hi 12°C / Lo 6°C

Mark Steel: Why not hold all trials in private?

They'd have put Cherie Blair on the inquiry, only she'd have charged a fee

I'd love to have spent the last couple of days with Tony Blair or Alastair Campbell. Because at some point they're sure to have said, "There's a million people on the streets against a lying and warmongering, government. Surely now they have to take notice."

It's unlikely anything so interesting will come out of the inquiry into the Iraq war announced by Gordon Brown. Because it will be held entirely in secret, and is not allowed to "apportion blame", as this will prevent the inquiry being "clogged up by expensive lawyers."

Apparently this will encourage those called to be "more candid" about their behaviour. So why not change the whole legal system for similar reasons? Murderers would be so much more candid in a trial if they weren't weighed down by the thought of their comments being made public. "Between you and me I strangled the lot of them," they'd laugh, whereas once they're in that big room with lawyers and blame getting in the way they're BOUND to clam up.

How much quicker the law could be resolved without all that paraphernalia of cross-examining and working out who was telling the truth and other money-wasting nonsense. Just ask someone whether they did it, and if they say "Not really," or "I had to kill them because I'd heard they had some destructive weapons," the judge could say "Well that's pretty much cleared it up – who's next?"

And what a liberal turn Gordon Brown's taken with this "refusal to blame" attitude. He must have been listening to a radical parenting workshop in a field in Devon, so those responsible will be told, "OK – I'm hearing negative thought-lines resulting from imaginary-weapons-of-destruction-syndrome yeah, but I don't want you to feel blame for all the deaths OK, instead I want you to digest an alternative activity strategy of public speaking and praying so as not to stifle your creativity yeah."

In an effort to represent the expertise of many layers of society, the team running the inquiry has been drawn from a wide cross-section of knights. (To be fair only four out of the five in the team are knights. The other is a baroness, because New Labour stands by its slogan, "For the many not the few").

They're not even neutral knights, because Sir Lawrence Freedman wrote a memo on which Blair based a speech proposing war, and Sir Martin Gilbert has already said Blair and Bush may be seen as "akin to Roosevelt and Churchill." So why are they bothering to have an inquiry at all? It would make more sense to have a dinner party. Then they could release its conclusions that: 1) There was little alternative to war; 2) The recession is creating some wonderful opportunities for property in Italy; and 3) Sir John and Sir Roderic both knew the same masters at Eton, isn't that amazing?

They'd probably have put Tony and Cherie Blair on the inquiry team, except that Cherie would have charged an appearance fee and it would end up costing more than all the lawyers.

One minister defended the war yesterday by boasting that the levels of violence in Iraq are now at their lowest since 2003. So after six years and a million dead the place is finally back to the level of violence that existed before the invasion happened. But it's justified because one of the dead was Saddam, although with this new system of secrecy and disastrous wars for which no one in the government is to blame, if he was still around they'd be after him for advice.

More from Mark Steel

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

[info]duncanmcfarlane wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 12:27 am (UTC)
Good stuff Mark - agree completely
Please include Lord Hutton as a member
[info]slyfas wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 01:22 am (UTC)
Great piece Mark! I only wondered if it wouldn't be more poignant to make the inquiry's team membership 6 instead of 5. The sixth member should be Lord Hutton of the infamous "Hutton Inquiry" (remember the sexed-up dossier?). This would clear the mind of all doubters about the likely outcome of the secret inquiry.

What is the essence of any inquiry if the findings have been dictated before hand? That is, not to apportion blame. Why waste our dwindling resources on a whitewash simply for the sake of being seen to conduct inquiry?

I dare predict that Brown will back-pedal over this just like he did in the Gurkah case. He is in a tight corner. If he climbs down, he faces accusation of being weak and indecisive. If he doesn't, he face a humiliating defeat on William Hague's motion for a public inquiry which will gain cross-party support. How on earth is Brown described as 'intelligent'? He looks rather like a bumbling fool to me because of his inability to gauge the public mood and act consequently. Or, does he think that the people are there to manipulate and take liberty with it?
Re: Please include Lord Hutton as a member
[info]old_green wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 10:31 am (UTC)
Chicot served in Northern Ireland. So did Hutton

Chilcot probably worked with Hutton
Re: Please include Lord Hutton as a member
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 12:33 pm (UTC)
They're a collection of 'reliable' jolly good chaps, cerebral prostitutes all, quite able to do a whitewash without blatantly 'doing a Hutton job' which would be the accusation if he was included.
What more to expect?
[info]nled63 wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 02:35 am (UTC)

Secret trials? What more to expect from a Prime Minister who, at heart, is, & always has been - a Stalinist?
Re: What more to expect?
[info]paulinglasgow wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 12:51 pm (UTC)
A show trial, perhaps?
Labour always cries wolf
[info]iunomoneta wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 03:01 am (UTC)
The Government has cried wolf so many times that I'm surprised Brown didn't tell us that holding it in public would have resulted in us being blown up in 45 minutes.
Mark Steel: Why not hold all trials in private?
[info]ruhuman wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 04:59 am (UTC)
If Gordon Brown is organising it, it is likely to rigged like the previous tribunals on aspects of the war in Iraq set up by New Labour. Werther it is held in private or public. Nobody is going to take any notice of this typical white washing. We have seen it all before.

We should set up a Peoples Court, which will not only hold all evidence in public, it can apportion blame, if required. Perhaps the first question should be where are all those weapons of mass destruction.

Far too many good people have died or have life long injuries, we owe it to those people, both Iraqis and British who have suffered so much.
Why do Weasels weasel?
[info]trojan_horace wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 05:04 am (UTC)
Why aren't these appalling weasels being held to account by our media? Great article - but if Mark Steel can point out that this Enquiry will be no such thing and can bring only disrepute on both the Enquirers and the Government, shouldn't every Editor be crying foul about it? How on earth do they think they can get away with this?
Nothinig to hide?
[info]richleau wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 05:32 am (UTC)
Now then how often have we poor grunts been told not to be so uppity about the big brother state? Quite a few times, eh. From Tone to Gordy to...well, anyone in government and several coppers with impressive uniforms. They've told us not to complain or protest, after all if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.

So, Gordon what are you hiding? What do you know we don't? For Gordon does know a thing or two doesn't he, as do the rest of the cabinet. Knows very well what went on and why Tony had to put his faith in God, because sure as eggs are eggs he couldn't put is faith in facts that didn't fit his preaching.

What Gordon is doing is an insult to our intelligence. There are several earthy phrases to aptly describe and encapsulate the way this man is treating us none of which I can repeat here. I wish I could.
Mark Steel: Why not hold all trials in private?
[info]famulla wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 06:08 am (UTC)
Mark Steel: Why not hold all trials in private?
Mark I like you. Honest I do. However, this comment is not well done. You see Iraq has something to do with the money and politics. Talk of cash read this. Can you talk of this in public? No?
The sale will be syndicated. Barclays Capital, Goldman Sachs, HSBC and Royal Bank of Scotland will find buyers for the bonds. The DMO last sold debt in this way in 2005, with the sale of a 50-year inflation-linked gilt, but it is rare for gilts to be sold on a syndicated basis. Britain usually sells gilts through auctions
There are also concerns among investors that, with interest rates at record lows, inflation is being fuelled -hitting the value of investments,
The only place very private where not even a bird can go in the hidden prison or the hell. But I doubt that we can send any there. It is full like the MU players trying to breathe through the shots they got from the Aon and not AIG.
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
What do you suggest
[info]famulla wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 06:10 am (UTC)
While it is important to build consensus among your co-workers, it is really important to be able to get your boss to agree. Our lead article this week tells you how. We follow that with job questions you need to ask now. With staffing budgets shrinking or frozen, it is really important that each hire you make is the best it can be. This article gives you the tips you need to succeed. Our third article gives you a chance to show off to our peers. The article is about Total Cost of Ownership (TCO), but at the end is a sample case. Can you figure out which is the better choice? Which would you buy, A or B, if the wrong choice could get you fired?
Corrupt MPs face axe from angry voters. Wednesday, 10 June 2009 at 11:56 pm
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla

The real world
[info]gwilliamm wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 09:14 am (UTC)
Obviously the writer is living in an ideal world where everything is black and white, why do we not just send all the names and addresses of the serving soldiers & their relatives to the enemy in Iraq and Afghanistan?
'Clogged up by lawyers'
[info]bobbellinhell wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 11:20 am (UTC)
New Labour never allow anyone to get a fair trial if they can possibly help it. Compare the 'civil penalties' planned for identity card resisters and 16-18 year olds who won't sign up for 'voluntary' education or training.

I wish MS would have a word with his fellow columnist John Rentoul, who publicly claimed that New Labour 'never lied' about Iraq.
Tony Blair for EU president?
[info]old_green wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 12:12 pm (UTC)
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/generals-go-to-war-over-iraq-inquiry-1706908.html
Cameron would not stop Blair's EU bid

David Cameron has said he would allow Tony Blair a free run at becoming the EU's first president. According to reports, the Tory leader has informed senior colleagues not to oppose a Blair candidacy if the Lisbon Treaty, which creates the role, is ratified later this year. The issue is a thorny one for Mr Cameron, who has refused to answer questions about a Blair candidacy on the grounds that his party opposes the treaty.

There you have it.

Don't think you've seen the last of Blair yet.

That's why it's really so important to campaign for his prosecution.
That's why the Iraq inquiry is so important.

This isn't all over - not for Iraq, and not for us.
The people responsible for this are not merely free but able to do all of this again.
"free to do it again" - and the case of WonderTone the twirp is quite capable of engineering a war
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 12:58 pm (UTC)
with Russia as a stooge of you know who http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTbdnNgqfs8
What about using waterboarding and electric shocks to get Blair,, et al to tell the truth ????
[info]ffoulkes_aycke wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 01:56 pm (UTC)


The people at Guantanamo are experts at encouraging people to talk
Our inconvenient truth: Millions did not march & do not care
[info]albertosi wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 02:28 pm (UTC)
Mark, the inconvenient truth is that while a million marched ... the others "did not" -- and wouldn't march today, even with all that we know now about the lies and the waste and cruelty and the sheer mind-bending stupidity of the enterprise.

I guess a column telling the nation they are a "bunch of ****" wouldn't work too well ... but if anyone can get away it with it, you can ... promise, Mark. I'll march for you to get your job back.

But still, don't blame it all on Brown. After all, he is all set to go out into the real world any day now and have to get a proper job. Now is not the time for Brown to be making brand new enemies. Now is the time to set up dinner parties for partial knights (and a baroness).
[info]stevejones1234 wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 06:02 pm (UTC)
------"akin to Roosevelt and Churchill:-------

As they both would probably be convicted of war crimes now, it seems quite an apt comparison.
Thanks Mark
[info]kuma2000 wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 06:35 pm (UTC)
I trust you were being cynical here?
Brilliant
[info]feelymc5 wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 07:45 pm (UTC)
Absolutely fantastic piece. Laughed and smirked and can't think of a way to fault it or a wittier comment to add.
superb
[info]tonyrcollins wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 07:55 pm (UTC)
Great piece - very funny and enjoyable.
Iraq enquiry
[info]cikan wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 08:47 pm (UTC)
Spot on Mr. Steel, it would be fairer to divide the cost of the useless exercise that will run into tens of millions of pounds amongst the families of the victims, both here and in Iraq.
trials ? hell yeah !
[info]britfree wrote:
Wednesday, 17 June 2009 at 10:50 pm (UTC)
the executioners of my countryman harry stanley , they need a trial , the murderers of doctor david kelly , ditto ! oh i see , we're not supposed to be recommending public trials of our choice .....i'll get my coat

Columnist Comments

hamish_mcrae

Hamish McRae: A time for giving with a difference

With the recession, there is a shift from giving people things to giving them services

mark_steel

Mark Steel: Come rain or revo- lution, it's money they want

Haven't the 20th anniversary celebrations of the overthrow of communism been miserable?

terence_blacker

Terence Blacker: Science must never be political or emotional

Politicians and action groups select favourable data, ignoring inconvenient evidence


Loading...


Most popular in Opinion