Skip to main content
Where I Live
A-Z Index

BBC News

BBC Election 2005

Watch the BBC Election News
  • Election news alerts
  • Email services
  • Mobiles/PDAs
  • News for your site
Last Updated: Thursday, 28 April 2005, 03:24 GMT 04:24 UK
Full text: Written answer on Iraq advice
Lord Goldsmith
The war was 'legal through a combination of three resolutions'
On 17 March 2003, Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith gave a written answer to parliament in response to a question asking his view of the legal basis for the Iraq war, posed by Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale.

It came 10 days after he sent a document to the prime minister weighing up the legalities of Britain becoming involved in military conflict in Iraq, a document which was leaked to the BBC and Channel 4 on 27 April 2005.

Here is the full text of the 17 March response:

Authority to use force against Iraq exists from the combined effect of Resolutions 678, 687 and 1441.

All of these resolutions were adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter which allows the use of force for the express purpose of restoring international peace and security:

  • In Resolutions 678, the Security Council authorised force against Iraq, to eject it from Kuwait and to restore peace and security in the area.

  • In Resolution 687, which set out the ceasefire conditions after Operation Desert Storm, the Security Council imposed continuing obligations on Iraq to eliminate its weapons of mass destruction in order to restore international peace and security in the area. Resolution 687 suspended but did not terminate the authority to use force under Resolution 678.

  • A material breach of Resolution 687 revives the authority to use force under Resolution 678.

  • In Resolution 1441, the Security Council determined that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of Resolution 687, because it has not fully complied with its obligations to disarm under that resolution.

  • The Security Council in Resolution 1441 gave Iraq "a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations" and warned Iraq of the "serious consequences" if it did not.

    I remain of the opinion that the safest legal course would be to secure the adoption of a further resolution to authorise the use of force.
    Extract from Lord Goldsmith's advise on 7 March 2003

  • The Security Council also decided in Resolution 1441 that, if Iraq failed at any time to comply with and co-operate fully in the implementation of Resolution 1441, that would constitute a further material breach.

  • It is plain that Iraq has failed so to comply and therefore Iraq was at the time of Resolution 1441 and continues to be in material breach.

  • Thus, the authority to use force under Resolution 678 has revived and so continues today.

  • Resolution 1441 would in terms have provided that a further decision of the Security Council to sanction force was required if that had been intended. Thus, all that Resolution 1441 requires is reporting to and discussion by the Security Council of Iraq's failures, but not an express further decision to authorise force.


    Has China's housing bubble burst?
    How the world's oldest clove tree defied an empire
    Why Royal Ballet principal Sergei Polunin quit