The Report
of the Iraq Inquiry
849.
Baroness
Symons’ statement took place during a debate on the legality of
the
use of
armed force. In closing the debate, Baroness Symons again stated
that Lord
Goldsmith
had published his “advice”.299
850.
As Section 5
explains, the Written Answer was not Lord Goldsmith’s advice
or
his legal
opinion.
851.
Other points
raised during the debate on the legality of the use of armed force
are
set out in
the Box below.
The House
of Lords debated the legality of the use of armed force on the
evening of
17 March.
Opening the
debate, Lord Goodhart (Liberal Democrat) set out his view of the
legality of
the use of
force in Iraq without the specific authority of a further
resolution of the Security
Council.
Commenting on the summary of Lord Goldsmith’s legal advice to the
Government
he
stated:
“… we
should have liked to see much more detail of what must have been a
lengthy
opinion …
All we have seen is the baldly stated summary. We also regret that
the
… Attorney
General has not given us the opportunity to ask questions and to
hear
his answers.
“The
Attorney General’s opinion reaches a highly questionable
conclusion, which
is based
on a dubious interpretation of deliberately ambiguous
wording.
…
“Both the
United States and British Ambassadors to the United Nations
when
resolution
1441 was adopted said that it contained no automaticity. I believe
that
there was a
clear understanding that resolution 1441 did not confer a right of
action
without
referring back to the Security Council. Unless there had been such
an
understanding,
it would have been difficult if not impossible to get resolution
1441
through the
Security Council.
“A final
decision on the use of armed force requires judgement as to the
seriousness
of the
breaches by Iraq, the effectiveness of the inspection system and
whether the
breaches
could be corrected by means short of war. Those are difficult
decisions.
The
Attorney General is arguing that the Security Council has delegated
those
decisions
to the United Kingdom and the United States of America – in effect,
to the
US alone. I
do not believe that that is the kind of decision that the Security
Council
could, or
would, delegate to any one member, however powerful. A decision to
use
armed force
under Article 42 in full scale war is the most solemn decision that
the
Security
Council can ever take. The idea that vague and ambiguous words in
those
299
House of
Lords, Official
Report, 17 March
2003, column 1117.
548