It is thought to be the first time that Lord Bingham has expressed his views about the legal advice given to Mr Blair by the former Attorney General. The issue never came before Lord Bingham while he was sitting as a judge.
In Lord Bingham's view, the effect of unilateral action by Britain, the US and some other countries had been to undermine the foundation on which the post-1945 consensus had been constructed.
This set out that force – except in self-defence or to avert an impending humanitarian catastrophe – could not be used unless formally authorised by the United Nations' Security Council.
Lord Bingham summarised the former Attorney General's reliance on three interrelated Security Council resolutions as authorising the Iraq invasion.
On March 7, 2003 Lord Goldsmith considered that UN resolution 1441 could revive the authority to use force which had been suspended but not revoked in earlier resolutions.
Ten days later, Lord Goldsmith told MPs it was "plain" that Iraq had failed to comply with its disarmament obligations and was therefore in material breach of resolution 687.
This justified the use of force because "all that resolution 1441 requires is reporting to and discussion by the Security Council of Iraq's failures, but not an express further decision to authorise force",
Lord Bingham concluded this was "flawed" because "it was not plain that Iraq had failed to comply in a manner justifying resort to force and there were no strong factual grounds or hard evidence to show that it had".
It was also up to the entire Security Council to decide whether Iraq had failed to comply with the resolution.
Lord Bingham noted that Lord Goldsmith's argument for the invasion had been described as "unconvincing", a "bad argument" and "fatuous" by three other leading QCs.
Lord Bingham said: "The moment that a state treats the rules of international law as binding on others but not on itself, the compact on which the law rests is broken."
Last night, Lord Goldsmith said: "I stand by my advice of March 2003 that it was legal for Britain to take military action in Iraq. I would not have given that advice if it were not genuinely my view.
"Lord Bingham is entitled to his own legal perspective five years after the event, but at the time and since then many nations other than ours took part in the action and did so believing that they were acting lawfully."
Justice Secretary Jack Straw added: "Lord Goldsmith's advice that military action was lawful and in accordance with Security Council Resolutions was shared by many member states across the world.
"I do not accept Lord Bingham's conclusions, which do not, I am afraid, take proper account of the text of Security Council Resolution 1441 nor its negotiating history." link
A former top judge said that legal advice given to then prime minister Tony Blair before the invasion of Iraq in 2003 was fundamentally "flawed".
In a speech in London on Monday, Thomas Bingham said the statement by the government's then chief lawyer, Peter Goldsmith, just before the US-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, "was flawed in two fundamental respects".
He said it failed to acknowledge the lack of hard evidence implicating Iraq's non-compliance with United Nations Security Council resolutions, which prompted Britain and the United States to take military action.
"It was not plain that Iraq had failed to comply in a manner justifying resort to force and there were no strong factual grounds or hard evidence to show that it had," he said.
"Hans Blix and his team of (UN) weapons inspectors had found no weapons of mass destruction, were making progress and expected to complete their task in a matter of months."
In his speech at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law, Bingham also suggested that Goldsmith's advice neglected to make clear that only the UN Security Council could authorise further action.
The former law lord said that if military action was unauthorised, "there was, of course, a serious violation of international law and of the rule of law".
The debate revolved around whether UN Security Council Resolution 1441 on Iraq, agreed in 2002, revived the authorisation of the use of force in earlier resolutions or whether a second decision on military action was needed.
Britain and the United States believed it was not.
Goldsmith defended his advice Monday, saying: "I stand by my advice of March 2003 that it was legal for Britain to take military action in Iraq. I would not have given that advice if it were not genuinely my view.
"Lord Bingham is entitled to his own legal perspective five years after the event, but at the time and since then many nations other than ours took part in the action and did so believing that they were acting lawfully."
He said the UN resolution that Iraq was deemed to have failed to comply with did not need further agreement by the security council.
Justice Secretary Jack Straw supported Goldsmith, saying: "I do not accept Lord Bingham's conclusions, which do not, I am afraid, take proper account of the text of Security Council Resolution 1441 nor its negotiating history." link
Legal advice given to Tony Blair by the attorney general prior to the Iraq war was fundamentally "flawed," a former law lord has claimed.
Lord Bingham said Lord Goldsmith had given Mr Blair "no hard evidence" that Iraq had defied UN resolutions "in a manner justifying resort to force".
Therefore, the action by the UK and US was "a serious violation of international law," Lord Bingham added.
Lord Goldsmith said he stood by his advice to the then prime minister.
The Liberal Democrats say that Lord Bingham's comments made a full public inquiry "unavoidable" into the decision to invade Iraq.
Responding to Lord Bingham's criticism, Lord Goldsmith insisted the invasion of Iraq was legal.
"I would not have given that advice if it were not genuinely my view," he said.
'No weapons'
Lord Bingham made his comments in a speech on the rule of law at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law in London.
He referred to a written parliamentary statement made by Lord Goldsmith on 17 March 2003 in which he confirmed that war on Iraq would be legal on the grounds of existing UN resolutions.
Lord Bingham said: "This statement was flawed in two fundamental respects."It was not plain that Iraq had failed to comply in a manner justifying resort to force and there were no strong factual grounds or hard evidence to show that it had.
"Hans Blix and his team of weapons inspectors had found no weapons of mass destruction, were making progress and expected to complete their task in a matter of months."
Lord Bingham also criticised Lord Goldsmith for failing to make clear that only the UN Security Council could judge whether there had been compliance and, if appropriate, authorise further action.
"If I am right that the invasion of Iraq by the US, the UK and some other states was unauthorised by the Security Council there was, of course, a serious violation of international law and of the rule of law," he said.
Lord Goldsmith said his critic was "entitled to his own legal perspective".
"But at the time and since then many nations other than ours took part in the action and did so believing that they were acting lawfully," he said.
He also said the UN resolution that Iraq was deemed to have defied - 1441 - did not need further determination by the Security Council.
Lord Chancellor Jack Straw backed Lord Goldsmith, arguing that his advice "was shared by many member states across the world".I do not accept Lord Bingham's conclusions, which do not, I am afraid, take proper account of the text of Security Council Resolution 1441 nor its negotiating history," Mr Straw said.
But Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg said Lord Bingham's claims made a full public inquiry into the government's decision to go to war "unavoidable".
"Lord Bingham's stature means that his devastating criticism cannot just be brushed under the carpet," Mr Clegg said.
"This is a damning condemnation of what was an unjustified invasion which we now know to have flouted international law."
Former lord chief justice Lord Bingham retired from the bench in July. Lord Goldsmith stepped down from his post as attorney general last year. link
[+/-] show/hide this post
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home