The Report
of the Iraq Inquiry
“I was
there. I was therefore in a position to answer all questions. I was
in a position
to say that
my opinion was that this was lawful. I did manage to say – I did
say that
there was
another point of view, but they knew that very well in any
event.”402
884.
Lord Turnbull
confirmed that in his view the requirements of the Ministerial
Code
had not
been breached because Lord Goldsmith was present in person, rather
than
another
Minister reporting his advice.403
885.
Asked about
the fact that Lord Goldsmith’s advice of 7 March had raised
the
issue of
the exposure of Ministers and Crown servants, both military and
civil, to risk,
Mr Brown
told the Inquiry:
“I knew …
that the Permanent Secretary to the Civil Service [sic] and the
military
Chiefs [of
Staff] had required, as they should, clear guidance … So I knew
that they
were
satisfied that they had got the legal assurances that were
necessary.”404
886.
In his
Statement to the House of Commons on the evening of 17
March,
Mr Straw
stated that the Government had reluctantly concluded that
France’s
actions had
put a consensus in the Security Council on a further
resolution
“beyond
reach”.
887.
As a result
of Saddam Hussein’s persistent refusal to meet the
UN’s
demands,
Cabinet had decided to ask the House of Commons to support
the
UK’s
participation in military operations should they be necessary to
achieve
the disarmament
of Iraq “and thereby the maintenance of the authority of
the
United
Nations”.
888.
Mr Straw
stated that Lord Goldsmith’s Written Answer “set out the
legal
basis for
the use of force”.
889.
Mr Straw
drew attention to the significance of the fact that no-one “in all
the
discussions
in the Security Council and outside” had claimed that Iraq was in
full
compliance
with its obligations.
890.
Mr Straw
made a statement to the House of Commons at 8.24pm.405
402
Public
hearing 21 January 2011, pages 217-218.
403
Public
hearing, 13 January 2010, page 68.
404
Public
hearing, 5 March 2010, pages 65-66.
405
House of
Commons, Official
Report, 17 March
2003, columns 703-705.
160