Lester QC vs Goldsmith QC: Lib Dem peer says “He didn’t give the correct legal view”

Channel 4 News asked top lawyer and Lib Dem peer Lord Lester for his view on former Labour attorney general Lord Goldsmith’s evidence to the Chilcot inquiry into the war against Iraq. You can see the eight-minute video below, together with C4’s news report:

Lord Lester QC, a leading human rights lawyer and expert in international law, believes Lord Goldsmith failed in his responsibilities on Iraq. “He didn’t give the correct legal view,” says the Lib Dem peer.

As Britain went to war in March 2003, 16 out of 17 international law experts disagreed with Lord Goldsmith’s decision. “The case is completely overwhelming that Lord Goldsmith’s final view was contrary to international law.” …

Lord Lester describes Lord Goldsmith’s decision to miss the Lords debate on the legality of the war on 17 March 2003 as “devious and sneaky”. As Lord Lester explains, Goldsmith “was reluctant to allow parliament to question him because the answers would have been devastating. It meant the government was not called into account on the eve of the war.”

After the invasion of Iraq, Lord Lester battled to find out the date on which the government first sought and obtained legal advice. The information was so sensitive he had to use the Freedom of Information Act to obtain it.

“It became apparent the legality of war was discussed when Tony Blair had gone to see President Bush, at a very early stage, in April 2002. The decision was in everyone’s minds long before most people thought it was.”

Lord Lester has watched the Chilcot inquiry closely but is frustrated there are no lawyers on the panel. “Although they are doing a fine job in asking questions, the inquiry lacks the kind of punch and direction that a skilled counsel for the tribunal would of had. I can’t understand why they never did that.” …

What happened before Britain went to war was a “scandal” according to Lord lester. Parliament was misled about the Attorney General’s true advice, and the cabinet was not presented his full opinions.

“It was deplorable, as a matter of proper government, that neither parliament nor government was properly informed.” Lord Lester continues, “The attorney General had the difficult decision: should he resign or should he he not? His conscience will live with him forever.”

You can read the report here.

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.


  • It is clear from Lord Goldsmith’s own account that he took his orders, not from Lord Falconer or Alastair Campbell, or even Tony Blair, but from the main man himself – (Vice-)President Dick Cheney. One wonders if the order to murder Dr David Kelly came from the same source. I fear that the only way we are going to get answers is by putting Blair in the dock in The Hague.

  • “I can’t understand why they never did that.”

    I’m pretty certain someone as intelligent as Lord Lester can work out EXACTLY why they never did that!

  • Why have the Liberal Democrats not launched some form of attempt to prosecute Blair et al for their crimes?

  • Could we not attempt to bring a private prosecution?

  • For what though? I don’t see what offence under UK law is committed by undertaking a war which has been backed by Parliament.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?


Recent Comments

  • Roland
    @Hywel - It is a difficult area, however, fundamentally, what the Tavi offers is conversion therapy, just a variant that reinforces a person's perception of the...
  • Alex Wilcock
    Thank you, Caron (and Christine, and Daisy)! The best, simplest way I’ve seen of getting across the problem with the transphobic dog-whistle three words wa...
  • Mark ValladaresMark Valladares
    @ Denis, Maybe. But, if you knew that a phrase was one used by people in support of a contention that a group within the community simply shouldn’t be able...
  • Nigel Quinton
    Thank you Caron for highlighting Christine’s appearance on Women’s Hour. I listened on BBC Sounds today and thought she was excellent....
  • Denis Mollison
    @William Francis If you could look at it the other way round, perhaps it isn't "hatred" or a "dog whistle", just a defensive reaction from someone who feels eq...