Philippe Sands: The crucial questions about the war's legality

The Foreign Secretary has adopted a first-class 'bootstraps' argument of impressive circularity

Share
Related Topics

Yesterday in the Commons, the Foreign Secretary mounted a spirited defence of the Government's position on the Attorney General's advice on the legality of the war in Iraq. The performance reminded me of the similarly robust defence he adopted in March 2000 (as Home Secretary), when he decided to allow Senator Pinochet to avoid extradition to Spain on the grounds that his failing health would not permit him to stand trial. Five years on, the Senator appears to be in rude health. And the Chilean courts, having stripped him of immunity, consider him fit enough to stand trial.

Yesterday in the Commons, the Foreign Secretary mounted a spirited defence of the Government's position on the Attorney General's advice on the legality of the war in Iraq. The performance reminded me of the similarly robust defence he adopted in March 2000 (as Home Secretary), when he decided to allow Senator Pinochet to avoid extradition to Spain on the grounds that his failing health would not permit him to stand trial. Five years on, the Senator appears to be in rude health. And the Chilean courts, having stripped him of immunity, consider him fit enough to stand trial.

Evidently the Foreign Secretary chose his words with great care. Most striking was what he did not say. Despite having every opportunity to do so, I did not hear him deny that there was a substantive change between the content of the Attorney General's final written legal advice (on 7 March 2003) and the content of the Attorney's final view (as set out in an answer to the Parliamentary Question on 17 March 2003).

To the contrary, Mr Straw seemed to go out of his way to address one of the many questions that is now being asked: what happened in the 10 days between the written advice and the answer to the Parliamentary Question to allow a change?

In answering that question, Mr Straw implicitly accepted that there had been a change. There is nothing wrong with that. Like any lawyer advising on any matter, the Attorney General was entitled to reach a "clearer" view. The difficulty is the justification which now seems to have been put forward for the change: Mr Straw seemed to say that the new development (between 7 and 17 March) was the failure to achieve a consensus within the Security Council, with the result that the desired second resolution could not be adopted.

The claim is hardly persuasive. Even before the ink was dry on Security Council resolution 1441 - adopted in November 2002 giving Iraq one final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under [earlier] resolutions - lawyers were turning their attention to the key question: who decides whether Iraq is in material breach of Security Council resolutions so as to justify the use of force; the Security Council or the Prime Minister?

The Ministerial Code of Conduct requires the Attorney General to be consulted "in good time before the Government is committed to critical decisions involving legal considerations". The Attorney General had four months to advise on whether a second Security Council was required to justify the use of force against Iraq. I have always thought the question was reasonably straightforward and would not require a great deal of agonising. Evidently the Foreign Office legal advisers felt the same way, as Elizabeth Wilmshurst's resignation letter makes clear.

The new "fact" identified yesterday by the Foreign Secretary is totally irrelevant. It seems not to have caused the Foreign Office legal advisers or many other observers to change their minds. Of course the possibility cannot be excluded that new facts could have emerged in the period between 7 and 17 March to indicate conclusively that Saddam Hussein was in material breach of resolution 1441.

If anything, the contrary was true: on 7 March Hans Blix had given his third presentation to the Security Council, concluding that although Iraqi co-operation was not complete it was accelerating. And the Government's own Joint Intelligence Committee had not come up with anything after late December 2002 to indicate material new facts to justify the use of force.

The truth is that all the material facts and legal considerations were known on 7 March 2003 and did not change after that. The collapse of negotiations for a second Security Council resolution is not relevant to the legal issues on which the Attorney General had to advise. The Foreign Secretary has adopted a first-class "bootstraps" argument of impressive circularity: he claimed, in effect, that the Security Council's failure to agree on the terms of a second resolution could itself justify a "clearer" legal view that no second resolution was required. That such a claim can be made indicates the paucity of options available to the Government.

Tony Blair's present difficulties are entirely of his own making. He left it far too late to get written legal advice from his Attorney General. His style of government allowed the Attorney General to give an answer to a Parliamentary Question which was not backed up by complete and consistent written legal advice, leading to the suggestion from Clare Short and others that Cabinet and Parliament may have been misled.

All of this undermines trust in government. The unanswered questions which remain in relation to the legal advice on the road to war need to be brought to an end. The only way that can be done is for the advice to be published. That should be done now, so that the Government can move on in its quest to restore confidence.

Philippe Sands QC is Professor of Law at University College, London, and the author of 'Lawless World' (Allen Lane)

React Now

Latest stories from i100
Have you tried new the Independent Digital Edition apps?
iJobs Job Widget
iJobs General

Website Editor

£15 - £17 Per Hour: Clearwater People Solutions Ltd: Our client is currently r...

Year 1 Teacher

Negotiable: Randstad Education Birmingham: The Job An inner city Birmingham sc...

Year 2 Teacher - Maternity cover

£120 - £130 per day: Randstad Education Luton: Year 2 maternity cover, startin...

KS1 Teacher

£95 - £150 per day: Randstad Education Birmingham: Key Stage 1 teacher require...

Day In a Page

Read Next
Young Syrian refugees gather around a small fire at the Minieh camp in Lebanon  

Cameron and Obama may want to ‘destroy’ Isis, but what will they do about the growing number of refugees fleeing Iraq and Syria?

Kate Allen
“You're running away!” Nick said to me the other night as I tried to leave the hospital  

In Sickness and in Health: ‘There’s nothing I want more than to have you at home, but you’re not well’

Rebecca Armstrong
A roller-coaster tale from the 'voice of a generation'

Not That Kind of Girl:

A roller-coaster tale from 'voice of a generation' Lena Dunham
London is not bedlam or a cradle of vice. In fact it, as much as anywhere, deserves independence

London is not bedlam or a cradle of vice

In fact it, as much as anywhere, deserves independence
Vivienne Westwood 'didn’t want' relationship with Malcolm McLaren

Vivienne Westwood 'didn’t want' relationship with McLaren

Designer 'felt pressured' into going out with Sex Pistols manager
Jourdan Dunn: Model mother

Model mother

Jordan Dunn became one of the best-paid models in the world
Apple still coolest brand – despite U2 PR disaster

Apple still the coolest brand

Despite PR disaster of free U2 album
Scottish referendum: The Yes vote was the love that dared speak its name, but it was not to be

Despite the result, this is the end of the status quo

Boyd Tonkin on the fall-out from the Scottish referendum
Manolo Blahnik: The high priest of heels talks flats, Englishness, and why he loves Mary Beard

Manolo Blahnik: Flats, Englishness, and Mary Beard

The shoe designer who has been dubbed 'the patron saint of the stiletto'
The Beatles biographer reveals exclusive original manuscripts of some of the best pop songs ever written

Scrambled eggs and LSD

Behind The Beatles' lyrics - thanks to Hunter Davis's original manuscript copies
'Normcore' fashion: Blending in is the new standing out in latest catwalk non-trend

'Normcore': Blending in is the new standing out

Just when fashion was in grave danger of running out of trends, it only went and invented the non-trend. Rebecca Gonsalves investigates
Dance’s new leading ladies fight back: How female vocalists are now writing their own hits

New leading ladies of dance fight back

How female vocalists are now writing their own hits
Mystery of the Ground Zero wedding photo

A shot in the dark

Mystery of the wedding photo from Ground Zero
His life, the universe and everything

His life, the universe and everything

New biography sheds light on comic genius of Douglas Adams
Save us from small screen superheroes

Save us from small screen superheroes

Shows like Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D are little more than marketing tools
Reach for the skies

Reach for the skies

From pools to football pitches, rooftop living is looking up
These are the 12 best hotel spas in the UK

12 best hotel spas in the UK

Some hotels go all out on facilities; others stand out for the sheer quality of treatments