Don't miss




Donors pledge millions at Uganda refugee summit

Read more


Depp plumbs depths of bad taste

Read more


France's new frontman, America's absent center, May's Brexit gambit, Saudi royal reshuffle, after Mosul & Raqqa fall

Read more


Senegal’s Casamance hopes for new era of peace

Read more


FARC disarmament a 'historic day' for Colombia, says president

Read more


Cruise collections: All aboard for Dior and Chanel's latest fashions

Read more


Colombia comes to France

Read more

#THE 51%

The last taboo: Helping women and girls. Period.

Read more


Who benefits when the ice caps melt?

Read more


Govt to veto publication of talks on Iraq war's legality

Latest update : 2009-02-25

The British government announced on Tuesday that it would veto the publication of minutes from ministerial meetings discussing whether the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 was in accordance with international law.

AFP - The British government said Tuesday it would veto publication of minutes from ministerial discussions about the legality of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, immediately drawing accusations of a cover-up.
Anti-war campaigners believe the minutes may conceal damaging information about how then prime minister Tony Blair's government reached the decision to support the US-led invasion.
However, current Prime Minister Gordon Brown's administration fears publishing the minutes may hinder ministers' ability to speak freely at confidential weekly Cabinet meetings.
"Confidentiality serves to promote thorough decision-making," Justice Secretary Jack Straw told parliament's lower House of Commons.
"Disclosure of the Cabinet minutes in this case jeopardises that space for thought and debate at precisely the point where it has its greatest utility.
"In short, the damage that disclosure of the minutes in this instance would far outweigh any corresponding public interest in their disclosure."
Some lawmakers greeted his announcement with cries of "shame!"
The government had faced calls to release the minutes under Britain's freedom of information laws.
Its unprecedented move came after the watchdog Information Tribunal last month ordered the release of minutes from Cabinet meetings on March 13 and 17, 2003, when ministers had discussed whether war was allowed under international law.
Campaigners are particularly keen to get hold of the minutes due to concerns about advice given to Blair's Cabinet by Peter Goldsmith, then the attorney general, or senior legal adviser.
In advice published on March 17 of that year, Goldsmith stated that military action against Iraq was legal. However, Goldsmith's earlier, more equivocal counsel was not disclosed at that stage and eventually leaked out.
Goldsmith then denied that ministers had pressured him into changing his mind to rule that invading Iraq would be legal under international law, even without a second United Nations Security Council resolution.
Blair faced heavy criticism from many in Britain for backing former US president George W. Bush in invading Iraq to oust dictator Saddam Hussein despite failing to secure a second UN resolution.
Kate Hudson, chairman of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, called the veto "disgraceful", adding it was "yet another attempt to suppress public debate on the biggest political scandal in decades."
"The use of the veto cannot be justified in any way -- there is no risk to candid discussions in Cabinet as such minutes do not single out those making each point," she said.
"The disgrace of the attorney general 'changing his mind' on whether the war could be justified must be exposed in all its detail."
Straw's move was backed by the main opposition Conservative Party, although justice spokesman Dominic Grieve urged a public inquiry into Britain's involvement in the Iraq war.

Date created : 2009-02-25