[Media-watch] FO defends secrecy of Iraq advice - Guardian - 16/2/2005

[Julie-ann Davies]

 FO defends secrecy of Iraq advice

Patrick Wintour, chief political correspondent
Wednesday February 16, 2005
The Guardian

The Foreign Office's arguments for keeping secret the date on which the 
attorney general was first asked whether an invasion of Iraq would be 
illegal is "implausible and wrong", the parliamentary ombudsman, Ann 
Abraham, has ruled.
But the department has decided to ignore the decision, saying that releasing 
the date might be misinterpreted and might and inhibit free discussion in 
the government.

Releasing the date would make it necessary to reveal other information to 
put it in context, the Foreign Office said. If such information were put in 
the public domain, it might be misinterpreted, it added.

Lord Lester, a Liberal Democrat peer, requested the date under the code on 
open government, the precursor to the Freedom of Information Act.

He wanted to discover how long the government had been planning an invasion, 
and was investigating whether the attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, had 
adapted his advice, as has been alleged, under last minute pressure from 
Downing Street and the forces.

He said the attitude of the Foreign Office to his request simply for the 
date was "Kafkaesque and deplorable".

The government has already announced that it will not release the advice 
itself.

The Butler inquiry into the use of intelligence, published last summer, 
reported that the attorney general "was briefed on the relevant intelligence 
issues in September 2002 and February 2003".

Lord Goldsmith gave his advice on March 17 2003, the eve of the war. He did 
not do so until he received assurances from the prime minister that it was 
"essential" to the govern ment's legal justification for war that there 
should be "strong evidence" of continuing material breaches by Iraq of UN 
security council resolutions.



Lord Lester has been seeking the date since March 2004, but was told only 
this week that the Foreign Office was going to ignore a recommendation by 
the parliamentary ombudsman in favour of release.

The Foreign Office told the ombudsman that disclosure "could harm the 
frankness and candour of internal discussion, a view that had been reached 
in full consideration of any public interest there might be in having the 
information released".

"Disclosure of the date or fact of a request for legal advice might act as a 
disincentive to others to seek such advice in future, because of the 
assumptions that might be drawn, whether correctly or otherwise, from the 
fact of such advice having been sought."

The department's permanent secretary said it "would in fact be difficult to 
provide a straightforward answer to Lord Lester's question, given that legal 
aspects of Iraq's position had been more or less continuously under 
consideration since the invasion of Kuwait in 1990".

The ombudsman concluded: "I find it difficult to understand what harm might 
be caused by the department, in releasing the date of this minute ... and I 
cannot see the seeking of legal advice in this context as anything other 
than a justifiable piece of precautionary administration.

"Nor do I believe that the release of such information would inhibit 
ministers or officials from seeking such information in future cases."

Lord Lester said he would ask for the date under the Freedom of Information 
Act.