Court's Verdict Regarding BAE

A summary of the court's verdict has been published online (hat-tip UK Liberty). In conclusion it states:

Conclusion

170. The claimants succeed on the ground that the Director and Government failed to recognise that the rule of law required the decision to discontinue to be reached as an exercise of independent judgment, in pursuance of the power conferred by statute. To preserve the integrity and independence of that judgment demanded resistance to the pressure exerted by means of a specific threat. That threat was intended to prevent the Director from pursuing the course of investigation he had chosen to adopt. It achieved its purpose.

171. The court has a responsibility to secure the rule of law. The Director was required to satisfy the court that all that could reasonably be done had been done to resist the threat. He has failed to do so. He submitted too readily because he, like the executive, concentrated on the effects which were feared should the threat be carried out and not on how the threat might be resisted. No-one, whether within this country or outside is entitled to interfere with the course of our justice. It is the failure of Government and the defendant to bear that essential principle in mind that justifies the intervention of this court. We shall hear further argument as to the nature of such intervention. But we intervene in fulfilment of our responsibility to protect the independence of the Director and of our criminal justice system from threat. On 11 December 2006, the Prime Minister said that this was the clearest case for intervention in the public interest he had seen. We agree.

Government 'Wrong' To Drop BAE Inquiry

A stunning indictment of the British government's craven attitude towards Saudi Arabia and big business:

The high court today ruled that the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) was wrong to drop an investigation into alleged bribery in a massive arms deal between BAE Systems and Saudi Arabia.

The decision represents a stunning victory for Campaign Against Arms Trade and Corner House Research, which campaigns against corruption in international trade, as well as a major embarrassment for the government.

The two groups sought a review of the decision by the SFO director, Robert Wardle, to drop the investigation into allegations of bribery and corruption in contracts between BAE Systems and Saudi Arabia. BAE and a Saudi national security adviser, Prince Bandar, deny the accusations.

At a two-day hearing in February, lawyers for the groups argued that the SFO's decision in December 2006 to drop its investigation into the Al-Yamamah deal was caused by Saudi Arabian pressure that amounted to diplomatic blackmail.

Tony Blair, the then prime minister, said the Saudis had privately threatened to cut intelligence cooperation over terrorism unless the inquiry was stopped.

In today's ruling, Lord Justice Moses and Mr Justice Sullivan ruled Wardle "was required to satisfy the court that all that could reasonably be done had been done to resist the threat".


The judge went on to comment:

"No one, whether within this country or outside, is entitled to interfere with the course of our justice."

"It is the failure of government and the defendant to bear that essential principle in mind that justifies the intervention of this court."


This story goes to the very heart of all that was wrong with Tony Blair and his government. Fortunately for him, he has left office and has managed to collect a multitude of well payed roles within the corporate sector. This government, as it did with the Iraq war, has put the interests of a foreign power ahead of that of the UK and it's people.

Meanwhile, not all media outlets were keen to recognise the importance of this event. Only a couple of minutes into a report by a correspondent of Sky News, the channel decided to switch to a live press conference involving the parents of Madeline McCann about a new child protection system. In short, with all due sympathy to the parents, this was a pretty minor story when compared with the corrupt nature of the British government (at time of writing, it seems to have barely registered on the radar of most media outlets). Once again, the mainstream media diverts attention while our government continues to act in a corrupt manner. That they use the spectre of child abduction to do so is even more sickening.

British Government Sought to Protect Relationship with Israel

This from The Guardian:

The full extent of government anxiety about the state of British-Israel relations can be exposed for the first time today in a secret document seen by the Guardian.

The document reveals how the Foreign Office successfully fought to keep secret any mention of Israel contained on the first draft of the controversial, now discredited Iraq weapons dossier. At the heart of it was nervousness at the top of government about any mention of Israel's nuclear arsenal in an official paper accusing Iraq of flouting the UN's authority on weapons of mass destruction.

The dossier was made public this week, but the Foreign Office succeeded before a tribunal in having the handwritten mention of Israel kept secret.

The FO never argued that the information would damage national security. The Guardian has seen the full text and a witness statement from a senior Foreign Office official, who argued behind closed doors that any public mention of the candid reference would seriously damage UK/Israeli relations. In the statement, he reveals that in the past five years there have been 10 substantial incidents and 20 more minor ones relating to Israeli concerns about attitudes to their government within Whitehall.

The Information Tribunal, which adjudicates on disputes involving the Freedom of Information Act, agreed to remove the single reference to Israel when it ordered the release of the draft of the Iraqi weapons dossier written by John Williams, the FO's chief information officer at the time.

Along with unfavourable references to the US and Japan, the reference to Israel was written in the margin by someone commenting on the opening paragraph of the Williams draft. It was written against the claim that "no other country [apart from Iraq] has flouted the United Nations' authority so brazenly in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction".

This comes on the back of the 'revelation' that the UK government put the interests of the US government before the interests of UK citizens, the failure of Scotland Yard to arrest an alleged war criminal and the ongoing BAE scandal. All of this begs the question, when are we going to stop allowing other countries to dictate to us? When are we going to stick two fingers up to the Saudis, the Americans and the Israelis and determine out own course of action? When are we going to stop being controlled by the interests of others? I for one won't be holding my breath.