Search Results

1-10 of 10 results for subject:Iraq

Show detailed: On Off

Results: 10 20 50 100

Sort by: Newest first Oldest first

To ask the Solicitor General, what involvement (a) the Lord Chancellor and (b) Baroness Morgan had in preparation of the reply to the parliamentary Question tabled by the honourable Member for Stone to the Prime Minister on 11th March 2003, 401 c515-6W, 17 March 2003, on the legal basis for...

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Solicitor General

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

24 February 2005

For answer on

1 March 2005

Answered on

1 March 2005

Mr. Cash: To ask the Solicitor-General what involvement (a) the Lord Chancellor and (b) Baroness Morgan had in preparation of the reply to the parliamentary question tabled by the hon. Member for Stone to the Prime Minister on 11 March 2003 on the legal basis for military intervention in Iraq to which the Attorney-General referred in evidence to the Butler Inquiry on 5 May 2004; and if she will make a statement. [218964] Mr. Grieve: To ask the Solicitor-General where and in what buildings, the written statement made to Parliament on 17 March 2003 setting out the legal basis for the war in Iraq was prepared; and by whom. [219422] The Solicitor-General: The Attorney-General's written answer of 17 March 2003, Official Report, column 515W, which I relayed to the House, was drawn up in the office of the Attorney-General. Those involved were the Attorney-General and myself, two officials in our office, three officials from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Christopher Greenwood QC. The draft was also discussed with the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine of Lairg. The Attorney-General was fully involved throughout the drafting process and personally finalised and approved the answer. No other Minister or official was involved. In particular, neither Baroness Morgan of Huyton nor Lord Falconer of Thoroton, nor any official in the Prime Minister's office had any involvement whatever in the drafting of the answer. The Attorney-General has never said that they did so. As the Attorney-General has always made clear, he set out in the answer his own genuinely held, independent view that military action was lawful under the existing Security Council resolutions.

Date

1 March 2005

Reference

218964; 431 c1074-5W;431 c1070-1W

House

House of Commons

Prime Minister

To ask the Prime Minister, whether he intends Lord Butler's Committee to report on differences between (a) the intelligence gathered, evaluated and used by the Government before the conflict and (b) the intelligence and what has been discovered by the Iraq Survey Group since the end of the conflict. -...

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Prime Minister

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

9 February 2004

Reference

417 c1195W; 154214

House

House of Commons

Prime Minister

To ask the Prime Minister, if he will list the occasions since 1973 on which the advice of the Attorney-General to ministers was (a) published in full, (b) published in summary form and (c) reported orally to either House of Parliament. - Includes fact that it has been the practice...

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Prime Minister

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

22 May 2003

Reference

115474; 405 c914-5W;405 c914W

House

House of Commons

Prime Minister

To ask the Prime Minister, pursuant to the personal statement of 12 May 2003 of the Right honourable Member for Birmingham, Ladywood, 405 c36, if he will publish the advice of the Attorney General on the question of the post-war situation in Iraq to which she referred. - Inc ref...

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Prime Minister

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

15 May 2003

Reference

113489; 405 c363W;405 c361-2W

House

House of Commons

Dept for International Development

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, pursuant to her Answer to the honourable Member for Richmond Park of 26th March 2003, 402 c277, what the legal basis is for her statements (a) that UK armed forces are in Iraq as an occupying power, with humanitarian responsibilities and...

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Department for International Development

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

1 April 2003

Reference

106584; 402 c659W

House

House of Commons

Prime Minister

(Pursuant to his reply 14 March 2003, c482W) To ask the Prime Minister, if he will make a statement on the legal basis for military intervention against Iraq. (Dep 03/825).

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Prime Minister

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Tabled on

11 March 2003

For answer on

17 March 2003

Answered on

17 March 2003

Mr. Cash: To ask the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the legal basis for military intervention against Iraq. [102902] The Solicitor-General: [pursuant to the Prime Minister's answer, 14 March 2003, c. 482W]: The Attorney-General has given a written answer to a question from Baroness Ramsey in the House of Lords today in the following terms: 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: 1. In resolution 678 the Security Council authorised force against Iraq, to eject it from Kuwait and to restore peace and security in the area. 2. 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. 3. A material breach of resolution 687 revives the authority to use force under resolution 678. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. 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. 7. 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. 8. Thus, the authority to use force under resolution 678 has revived and so continues today. 9. 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. I have lodged a copy of this answer, together with resolutions 678, 687 and 1441 in the Library of both Houses.

Date

17 March 2003

Reference

102902; 401 c515-6W

House

House of Commons

Prime Minister

To ask the Prime Minister, if he will make a statement on the legal basis for military intervention against Iraq. (In Library Dep 03/825).

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Prime Minister

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

14 March 2003

Reference

102902; 401 c482W

House

House of Commons

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, if he will make a statement on the European Union's policy on sanctions against Iraq.

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

16 November 2000

Reference

356 c768W; 138682

House

House of Commons

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Supplementary on European support concerning military action against Iraq.

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Oral questions - 1st Supplementary

Status

Answered

Date

10 March 1998

Reference

308 c311

House

House of Commons

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Which of the member states of the European Union expressed support for the United Kingdom in its policy regarding preparations for military action against Iraq. (Failed OPQ).

Asked by

William Cash (Conservative)

Answering body

Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Type

Written questions

Status

Answered

Date

10 March 1998

Reference

31828; 308 c138W

House

House of Commons

Librarians' tools

Type

House

Session

Year

Department

Member

Primary member

Answering member

Legislative stage

Legislation

Subject

Publisher