Previous page | Contents | Next page
The Report of the Iraq Inquiry
“Normally, a Law Officer’s opinion is not disclosed. It was in fact, impossible in these
circumstances not to disclose what my conclusion was, because the clamour to
know … would have been frankly impossible to avoid. So I knew that I would have to
make some sort of statement as to what my position was. So that is the point about
the Parliamentary answer.”352
814.  Parliamentary Questions and Parliamentary Committees after 2003 sought to
probe whether Lord Goldsmith’s Written Answer to Baroness Ramsey on 17 March
constituted the Attorney General’s advice, and by implication, whether the Government
had waived, in the case of the legal advice on the basis of military action in Iraq, the
convention that neither the fact that the Attorney General had advised nor the content
of that advice were disclosed.353
815.  In his responses, Lord Goldsmith was always very careful to point out that
Baroness Ramsey had asked for, and he had provided, his view of the legal basis for
the use of force, not his advice.354
816.  The FCO paper, ‘Iraq: Legal Basis for the Use of Force’, stated that the legal basis
for the use of force in Iraq was the revival of the authorisation in resolution 678.355
817.  Specifically, the paper stated that in resolution 1441:
“… the Security Council has determined –
(1) that Iraq’s possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) constitutes
a threat to international peace and security;
(2) that Iraq has failed – in clear violation of its legal obligations – to disarm; and
(3) that, in consequence, Iraq is in material breach of the conditions for the
ceasefire laid down by the Council in SCR 687 at the end of hostilities in 1991,
thus reviving the authorisation in SCR 678.”
818.  Referring to the Security Council’s power under Chapter VII of the Charter to
authorise States to take military action, the paper set out the occasions during the 1990s
when action had been taken on the basis that Iraq’s non-compliance had broken the
conditions of the cease-fire in resolution 687 and the authority to use force in resolution
678 had been “revived”, as the “legal background” to resolution 1441.
352 Public hearing, 27 January 2010, pages 198-199.
353 House of Lords, Official Report, 6 November 2003, column 129WA; House of Lords, Official Report,
28 February 2005, column 1WA; House of Lords, Constitution Committee, Minutes of Evidence, 22 March
2006, Q41; House of Lords, Constitution Committee, Minutes of Evidence, 22 March 2006, Q41, Q241.
354 House of Lords, Official Report, 6 November 2003, column 129WA; House of Lords, Official Report,
28 February 2005, column 1WA; House of Lords, Constitution Committee, Minutes of Evidence, 22 March
2006, Q41; House of Lords, Constitution Committee, Minutes of Evidence, 22 March 2006, Q41, Q241.
355 Paper FCO, 17 March 2003, ‘Iraq: Legal Basis for the Use of Force’.
146
Previous page | Contents | Next page