Straw dismisses Iraq legal advice claims
The Foreign Secretary Jack Straw today described claims that the Attorney General changed his mind over the legal case for the war in Iraq as “wholly tangentious”.
Responding to claims that a letter from a former government aide showed that Lord Goldsmith changed his mind over the case for war just days before the conflict, Mr Straw said “it showed nothing of the kind”.
It follows the publication of a resignation letter from Elizabeth Wilmshurst, deputy legal adviser at the Foreign Office, which suggested that even as late as 7 March 2003 Lord Goldsmith was unconvinced the war would be legal without a second UN resolution.
By March 17 Lord Goldsmith had issued a written parliamentary statement detailing the legal case for war, and Mrs Wilmhurst resigned the following day.
Speaking in the House of Commons in response to an urgent question from Shadow Attorney General Dominic Grieve, Mr Straw said the view conveyed by the Attorney General in his written answer setting out the case for war on 17 March 2003 was his “genuinely and independently” held view.
Pressed by Mr Grieve as to why the “Attorney General’s position changed twice”, and to publish the “entire paper trail”, Mr Straw said it was a “wholly tangentious” claim that Lord Goldsmith had one view on March 7 and a different view later.
Mr Straw also hit back by asking the Conservatives whether they were now moving to a position that governments should publish law officers’ advice in all circumstances.
Initial copies of Ms Wilmshurst’s letter published by the Foreign Office contained two sentences that had been blacked out. Channel Four News later obtained a copy of the full letter including the sentences, which suggested that the Attorney General had changed his mind over the advice.
Mr Straw defended his department’s decision to blank out the sentences on the grounds that they concerned legal advice used in the case against Iraq and were covered by exemptions in the Freedom of Information Act.
He also accused the opposition of using this incident as a smokescreen to cover the fact that they also voted in favour of military action against Iraq.
Earlier today, Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy said the Government had “huge questions to answer” on this issue.
Conservative shadow Foreign Secretary Michael Ancram said Ministers were trying to save their own skin in view of the “damning evidence”.
“I think they have scored an enormous own goal,” he said.
In her resignation letter, Ms Wilmshurst said that an “unlawful” use of force on Iraq amounted to the “crime of aggression”.
The blacked out section of the letter read: “My views accord with the advice that has been given consistently in this office, before and after the adoption of UN security council resolution 1441.
“And with what the Attorney General gave us to understand was his view prior to his letter of March 7.
“The view expressed in that letter has of course changed again into what is now the official line.”
