I make no apologies for borrowing the title from a recent Times leader comparing the Chilcot inquiry to the Muppet Show, and the subtitle “At every turn, the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq War has been lower than farce. To call the inquiry “a farce” would be to endow it with a gravitas it does not deserve.” Amen to that.
I am totally bemused by the predilection of a section of the Great British Public to wallow in these endless inquiries, as if somehow they are relevant and ground breaking, and more to the point, that something relevant will emerge. It happened with Diana, now it’s happening with
But for the lawyers amongst you, the inquiry and its conclusions could indeed be ground breaking and I wonder if any thought has been put into the “farce” which might result.
Consider the possibilities. If the Iraq War was indeed illegal, all those who served in the armed forces during the invasion are liable to be prosecuted under the War Crimes Act 1991. This useless and misconceived piece of legislation makes it possible to prosecute
We also know that the defence of “just following orders” is not available, and hasn’t been since the Nuremburg trials in 1946, so we have the picture of thousands of British military personnel being prosecuted for war crimes and facing lengthy sentences of imprisonment. It beggars belief!
Then there is the question of collective responsibility. There is a convention that decisions taken in Cabinet abide by the principle of collective responsibility, and no matter how much those then members of government may now wriggle and squirm to distance themselves, a thoroughly unedifying spectacle, they are tarred with the same brush as Tony Blair, the Prime Minister at the time. So they too face collective prosecution. And what about the Members of Parliament who voted for the war? English law does not acknowledge ignorance as a defence, so they too are at risk of prosecution as they too voted for an illegal war. Those at risk come from both of the main parties, with only the Lib Dems whiter than white. So the two main parties may be prevented from putting forward candidates at the General Election who voted for the war, which gives the Lib Dems a clear run at elected office for the first time in nearly one hundred years. It’s too frightening even to contemplate.
Keir Stramer, the hitherto anonymous Director of Public Prosecutions, is going to be rushed off his feet, where before, his only contribution to the smooth running of the criminal justice system was to pontificate on assisted suicide. In that respect, if the latest farrago is to be believed, his attempts at clarity have fallen on deaf ears.
And finally, what about the victims of war, both during and after the conflict? By all accounts, thousands of Iraqis perished, or were maimed, in the course of an illegal war, so they too will be looking for compensation, and may have to be called as witnesses in the myriad of prosecutions which should flow if the war is deemed illegal. They will have to appear as witnesses in an English Court to give evidence, and the chances are that many of them will simply disappear into the ether, or claim political asylum, or both, which in turn will tie up the Immigration Service for years to come. And worse still, the compensation ‘pot’ will bankrupt this country at a time when borrowing is at an all time high. According to the remit of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority, the body charged with distributing compensation to victims of crime, the compensation awarded to the relatives of those killed illegally will reach five and six figure sums.
I conclude with the closing remarks of The Times leader: “This inquiry is an expedient born of political weakness and intended to defuse a debilitating public controversy. It has not worked. It cannot work.” To quote Statler and Waldorf from the Muppet Show:
“I guess all’s well that ends well,” says Statler.
“Doesn’t matter to me,” says Waldorf, “so long as it ends.”