'Marchwood 14' denied Attorney General's advice on the legality of the war

'Marchwood 14' denied Attorney General's advice on the legality of the war

Court report: Day 2

District Judge John Woollard has declined Greenpeace's application for a witness summons requiring the Attorney General to present his advice to Southampton Magistrates Court, where 14 activists are appearing over an attempt to stop the war in Iraq.

Tim Owen, QC for Greenpeace, argued that the disclosure was essential to ensure a fair trial. David Perry, representing the Attorney General, claimed the full advice was 'privileged' information that was not relevant to the trial and must therefore remain confidential.

DJ Woollard ruled the Attorney General's advice - which the Government used to justify its 2003 invasion of Iraq - would not be admissible as evidence.

The judge also refused Greenpeace's application for a witness summons calling on Elizabeth Wilmhurst, the former deputy legal adviser at the Foreign Office, to give evidence.

Ms Wilmhurst resigned from her post on the eve of the Iraq invasion, because she disagreed with the Attorney General on the legality of the war.

DJ Woollard ruled that Ms Wilmhurst's evidence was not crucial. Outside the court, Greenpeace Executive Director Stephen Tindale said, "Obviously we are disappointed by today's events, but we still intend to have a vigorous defence over the coming days and of course there is still the very real possibility of an appeal."

The 'Marchwood 14' are charged with aggravated trespass and criminal damage, relating to a protest last February. After entering the Marchwood Military Port, the activists chained themselves to tanks and gates, in a bid to prevent the war.

They argue that the war was immoral and illegal, and their actions were necessary to prevent the deaths of thousands of civilians. The defence team for civil servant Katherine Gun, who recently appeared in court for leaking Government information, was also preparing to argue that their client's actions were necessary under these circumstances. Gun's case was discontinued because the prosecution said it was unable to disprove her defence of 'necessity'.

The first of the 14 defendants took the stand to give evidence today. Scientist Dr Helen Wallace told the court she tried to stop the war because the death and destruction it would cause was unnecessary, unlawful and unjustified.

"I was opposed to the war because of the potential civilian casualties," she said, adding that she also feared the long-term consequences for Iraq's people, given the US's intention of using cluster bombs and to conduct large-scale bombing attacks on the country's infrastructure, including water and electricity supplies.

Wallace said she was concerned about Tony Blair's plans to follow the US into war, with or without the support of the United Nations (UN). "I had concerns about the war proceeding without a second UN resolution because it would undermine international law," she said.

For these reasons and more, Wallace said that although she was planning to attend one of the anti-war marches held around the nation on 15th of February, 2003, she wanted to do more. "[I] wanted to stop the war, not just register my opposition to it."

Wallace told the court she occupied a tank on 4th February 2003, because she hoped to highlight the issue "...and encourage others to take action and increase the political pressure on the Prime Minister not to go to war."

The trial will continue throughout the week.