Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
231.  Mr Blair’s decision to ask for Lord Goldsmith’s draft advice and his invitation
to Lord Goldsmith to attend Cabinet suggest that he intended the advice to inform
discussion in Cabinet on 16 January.
232.  But Mr Blair did not reveal that he had received Lord Goldsmith’s draft advice
which indicated that a further determination by the Security Council that Iraq was
in material breach of its obligations would be required to authorise the revival of
the authority to take military action in resolution 678.
233.  As the Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith was the Government’s Legal
Adviser not just the Legal Adviser to Mr Blair.
234.  There is no evidence that Mr Straw was aware of Lord Goldsmith’s draft
advice before Cabinet on 16 January, although he was aware of Lord Goldsmith’s
position.
235.  There is no evidence that Lord Goldsmith had communicated his concerns
to Mr Hoon or to any other member of Cabinet.
236.  Mr Blair’s decision not to invite Lord Goldsmith to speak meant that Cabinet
Ministers, including those whose responsibilities were directly engaged, were not
informed of the doubts expressed in Lord Goldsmith’s draft advice about the legal
basis of the UK’s policy.
237.  It may not have been appropriate for Lord Goldsmith to challenge the
assertions made by Mr Blair and Mr Straw, which repeated their previous public
statements, during Cabinet.
238.  Notwithstanding the draft nature of his advice, it would have been advisable
for Lord Goldsmith to have told Mr Straw and Mr Hoon of his concerns.
239.  Lord Goldsmith could also have expressed his concerns subsequently in
private. Other than his conversations with Mr Straw in early February, there is
no evidence that he did so.
240.  Ms Adams’ brief for Lord Goldsmith for Cabinet on 16 January stated:
“In the light of our discussion yesterday, if asked for your views on the interpretation
of resolution 1441, you might say that:
“you have not given advice”;
“you are waiting for further briefing from the FCO before finalising your views
(alluding to the proposed Greenstock discussion)”;
“it is therefore premature to express a view”; and
48
Previous page | Contents | Next page