Blair pressured to disclose report on legality of war

BRITAIN: The British Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, is coming under renewed pressure to disclose Attorney General Lord Goldsmith…

BRITAIN: The British Prime Minister, Mr Tony Blair, is coming under renewed pressure to disclose Attorney General Lord Goldsmith's full opinion on the legality of the Iraq war. Frank Millar reports from London

Mr Blair appeared rattled yesterday when questions about the war - and continuing controversy over his government's proposed new anti-terrorist laws - overshadowed a press conference on the Labour government's plans to increase the minimum wage.

A terse Mr Blair insisted Lord Goldsmith had dealt with the issue when he confirmed that a parliamentary answer giving his conclusion that the war was lawful represented "a fair summary" of his opinion. "That's what he said, and that's what I say," declared Mr Blair as he resisted attempts to press him on the issue.

However that failed to silence a growing chorus of demands for disclosure of Lord Goldsmith's full advice following reports that the summary presented to parliament in March 2003 might not have been written by the Attorney General.

READ MORE

Former Conservative attorney general Lord Mackay of Clashfern said that - having published Lord Goldsmith's conclusion (that the war was legal) - it was difficult for the government to justify its refusal to publish his full opinion "particularly if it contains qualifications". At the same time Whitehall expert Prof Peter Hennessy voiced the suspicion that Downing Street might be resisting publication because Lord Goldsmith's full opinion just weeks before the war might have contained "a smoking paragraph" suggesting the war could have been deemed illegal without further specific breaches of UN resolutions by Saddam Hussein.

In a book published this week Philippe Sands QC, a member of Cherie Blair's Matrix Chambers, says Lord Goldsmith warned the Prime Minister on March 7th 2003 that the war could be illegal without a second UN resolution sanctioning military action. The book also suggests that Lord Goldsmith's parliamentary answer 10 days later was actually written by then Home Office Minister Lord Falconer and Downing Street adviser Baroness Morgan. Lord Goldsmith met them in Downing Street on March 13th and in evidence to the Butler Inquiry into the run-up to the war, Lord Goldsmith reportedly said "they shortly set out my view" in the parliamentary answer on March 17th.

Lord Goldsmith has always denied being "leaned on" by Downing Street. He told the Press Association: "It was my genuine and independent view that action was lawful under existing (UN) Security Council resolutions. The parliamentary statement was genuinely my own view and I was not leaned on to give that view. It is nonsense to suggest that Number 10 wrote the statement."

However, while Mr Blair stood firm on Lord Goldsmith's statements on the issue, former minister Ms Clare Short said an inquiry was needed because failure to present the cabinet with the Attorney General's full opinion would have been a breach of the Ministerial Code.

"It says in the code that if any advice from the (government's) law officers is summarised when it comes to cabinet, the full advice should be attached," said Ms Short. "We need the House of Lords to set up a special committee, get all the papers out, look at exactly what happened."

Meanwhile Lord Mackay and senior Conservative MP Mr Michael Mates challenged Mr Blair's insistence that the advice of government law officers must always remain confidential. He said he saw "a risk to government and the system if there is a persistent belief ... that something crucial was not disclosed."