Greenpeace today comprehensively rejected the Attorney General's statement that the UK has the legal authority to attack Iraq.
Lawyers for Greenpeace have undertaken a line by line analysis of the legal arguments put forward in the Attorney General's statement and concluded that they do not constitute a legal basis for going to war without the backing of the UN.
Kate Harrison, Legal Advisor for Greenpeace UK said, "The Attorney General's statement shows that the government is scrabbling around for a legal justification for going to war."
The UK cannot got to war without unambiguous authority from the UN. There simply is no legal basis for individual members of the UN taking military action without UN approval.
The Attorney General does not say that 1441 alone gives them legal authority to go to war, as previously suggested by Tony Blair. Nor does he argue that war is legally justified by the need for self-defence or on humanitarian grounds. Instead it is suggested that 'authority exists from the combined effect of resolutions 678, 687 and 1441'.
The only resolution that did authorise force was 678, but this was explicitly linked to ejecting Iraq from Kuwait.
Ms Harrison continued, This exercise in legalistic cherry picking from earlier resolutions, dating back over 12 years, can't disguise the fact that the intended military action has not been authorised by the majority of the Security Council or even the majority of its permanent members.
For the government to argue it is taking this action to uphold the will of the UN, when the UN has not authorised military action is frankly bizarre.
Further Information For a full copy of Greenpeace's legal analysis click here or
Call Louise Edge at the Greenpeace UK Press Office on 020 7865 8115.
