High Court Judges Defy Reason to Protect Tony Blair 121


There were a number of errors (by me) in this original posting and therefore I have decided to remove it now I have seen the judgement itself. That these errors were in large part caused by erroneous mainstream media reports is a fact, but not an excuse for my being so outraged I rushed in without checking.

In fact, the judgement does accept there is a longstanding crime of waging aggressive war as part of international law, and does not (contrary to the Guardian’s report) argue at all that the international law only came into existence recently.

It argues however that international law is only captured in UK Law when this is done specifically through an Act of Parliament. Indeed the judgement goes so far as to state:

“the clear principle that it is for Parliament to make such conduct criminal under domestic law. Parliament deliberately chose not to do so.”

This surely is problematic. The judgement states that the UK, deliberately, does not follow international law in its domestic law. So the UK is an institutionalised rogue state. Its internal arrangements allow its rulers, its armed forces and other actors to commit international crimes and flout international law with no fear of domestic repercussion as a matter of conscious choice.

It would not be beyond the wit of man to draft domestic legislation making it a crime for those acting in service of the British state to breach international law; it would not be necessary to have separate legislation enacting each piece of international law individually. Separate legislation is however possible and often done – when in the FCO I was often concerned with the enactment of treaty or other international obligations into domestic law, which is generally by secondary legislation.

When Sir Michael Wood, the FCO’s chief legal adviser, told Jack Straw it would be illegal to invade Iraq, Straw replied that there was no court that could try the case. The full significance of that did not really strike me until today. It is no accident; the UK is deliberately set up to be psychopathic entity, its elite breaking international law at will, with no fear of retribution.


121 thoughts on “High Court Judges Defy Reason to Protect Tony Blair

1 2 3
  • Shakesvshav

    It looks like we are not going to advance beyond the symbolic decision of the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission any time soon. It seems the UN would have to set up a special tribunal like that established to deal with crimes in the former Yugoslavia, but that required a UNSC resolution. No chance.

    • Salford Lad

      The Malaysian war crimes Commision verdict of guilty, cost Malaysia 2 downed civilian passenger planes, MH17 and MH 372. A not too suble warning for their impudence, and incorporated an attempt to smear Russia as the culprit in the case of MH17.

  • Peter Beswick

    Summary

    Advice to Blair from his AG

    p34

    “Aggression is a crime under customary international law which automatically forms part of domestic law. It might therefore be argued that international aggression is a crime recognised by the common law which can be prosecuted in UK courts”

    The point here being Blair acted cognisant of this advice.

    http://downingstreetmemo.com/docs/goldsmithlegal.pdf

  • Sharp Ears

    Thank God he was not laying a wreath and reading from the OT at Tyne Cot this morning.

    Instead we had his successor, following Brown and Cameron, the female warmonger who is ready to make a first strike.

    1hr 40mins in
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b09098mn/world-war-one-remembered-passchendaele-2017-2-in-flanders-fields

    All these were honoured in their generations, and were the glory of their times.
    There be of them, that have left a name behind them, that their praises might be reported.
    And some there be, which have no memorial; who are perished, as though they had never been; and are become as though they had never been born; and their children after them.
    But these were merciful men, whose righteousness hath not been forgotten.
    With their seed shall continually remain a good inheritance, and their children are within the covenant.
    Their seed standeth fast, and their children for their sakes.
    Their seed shall remain for ever, and their glory shall not be blotted out.
    Their bodies are buried in peace; but their name liveth for evermore.
    Ecclesiasticus
    Chapter 44 8-14

    • sander

      Ah yes, that first time we went after oil hegemony and almost broke JP Morgan. Good times……

    • Ba'al Zevul

      Now that’s a positive action. And I imagine it would play nicely into a misconduct in public office case, should anyone have the insensitivity to charge Blair with that. Surely, it was his duty to ensure that records existed of the decision-making process? I mean, policemen and teachers (eg) spend half their time and more creating paper trails…why, suddenly, not prime ministers?

      I suspect that the real reason there’s nothing visible at the Cabinet Office is that none of Blair’s bright ideas were ever decided on in cabinet (another evasion of accountability), and that would add more weight to a MIPO case.

  • Sharp Ears

    There is no irony in the fact that Wood is now ‘a member of the International Law Commission’.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Wood_(lawyer)

    The ILC membership
    http://legal.un.org/ilc/ilcmembe.shtml

    Also at Essex St Chambers so raking it in presumably.
    http://www.20essexst.com/member/sir-michael-wood

    We know about Blair. his property portfolio, his sinister contacts and the rest.

    Straw, disgraced, is probably still receiving large wads from E & F Man Ltd for ‘advice’ such as this.

    Jack Straw advised client how to avoid release of emails under FOI
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/investigations/jack-straw-advised-client-how-to-avoid-release-of-emails-under-f/

    Milord Goldsmith, ex Attorney General, doing nicely as his name suggests. 🙂
    http://www.parliament.uk/biographies/lords/lord-goldsmith/2490 Register of Interests button

    I bet Straw is narked he never got a peerage.

  • Don Glover

    In other words, you just noticed today that “international law” is a pile of bollocks. What on earth took you so long?

    • J Galt

      It was “a pile of bollocks” in 1946!

      I agree, why all this surprise and hand wringing – it was ever thus.

  • Shakesvshav

    “To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” (Nuremberg principles). Hot air, apparently.

  • Laguerre

    Of course, it’s not only the past, Iraq, but also today, Yemen. With a bit of digging, it will soon be obvious that Brits are there in the Saudi control centres, guiding the Saudi air raids.

    Since Iraq, the West has become more subtle. Put the local power in the lead. Doesn’t change the policy though. Makes you realise how unsubtle Iraq was. Blair has been really lucky to get away with it.

    The problem lies in the policy. Wrecking Middle Eastern countries has no advantage for Britain. Only leads to masses of refugees. And then May rides her high horse to resist “immigrants”. But in fact Britain has taken very few refugees. Very little admittance of responsibility.

    What is needed is a change of policy. Why not try getting those ME countries working again? They have long histories, and capacity for economic development.

  • Carl Olsen

    Craig: It’s “judgment” for some unknown reason, not the far more logical “judgement”.

  • Anita struthers

    Evil man Tony Blair
    Unlawful laws
    Injustice justice system
    Uncontrollable corruption
    Sad

  • m boyd

    The German war criminals committed no crimes according to German positive law. That’s why the allies charged them with crimes against humanity according to natural law ie God’s law see Grotius. Tony Blair’s day will come.

  • Priscilla

    Obviously it was the wrong charge to have been brought against this war criminal. Treason against this very nation and her people is the only charge I will ever accept for justice.

  • Ishmael

    But how else to “solve” crisis, build them stately homes. This class system must be maintained, the market system, can one imagine if the plebs ever got wind of the scam of war. All that “servant” business at war memorials, all those dead to mantain empire/wealth for a tiny few, who then destroy all the things those people thought they were dying for.

    And these “patriots” then moan about some sprayed anarchist logo as disrespect, & curtail these very freedoms. How twisted inside must the whole upper class be.

    It is surly an incredible feat of social engineering of a deeply schizophrenic personality cult. And unfortunately it’s systematised so it really doesn’t matter how nice an indvidual is, the financial block dominates. & those of you who want nice people in place have imo the wrong idea. These will never be the rule as things stand and even if they where, most don’t stay that way for long.

    Why can’t people just admit there own propensity for corruption. Then we could at least stand together and make change rather than try & out do each other to be “better”.

    ATM We can do nothing compared to what ancient people achieved. Can you imagine the unity of spirit it took to build what the inca, or Egyptians, or stone henge achieved. They had “nothing” but what they did has lasted all these ages, monuments that undoubtedly transformed consciousness eternally. Those where the most advanced civilisations on earth, in the stone age.

  • Coli Glassey

    We all know Tony Blair and George W.Bush were war criminals .the corrupt judicial system and the people who support it should be implicated as well…

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Bob Smith July 31, 2017 at 23:35
        You don’t, already? I suggest you stop drinking the ‘Kool Aid’ (it’s pretty foul anyway; the best flavor was blackcurrant, just about).

  • giyane

    Therefore…. there is no crisis for the UK from breaking international law unless , as in the last year, it loses a war, which it just has in Syria. How many trillions of Saudi and Qatar cash poured into weaponising the Israel- cock-suckers Islamist jihad Al Qaida and Daesh, Syria has defeated the West.

    That is because Russia and China have used international law and USUKIS haven’t. The vestige of morality has survived in secularist communism while it has disappeared in the fanfare of bought trash, the MSM and political class, the manufacturers of vacuous false news generated by the West.

    Even less visible in the hierofascist Islamists is any evidence of God-derived law. just a lot of hocus-pocus and manufactured false shari’ah worthy of Gandalf and the special effects team, with many dollops of White City recorded Allahu Akbars.

    in conclusion, it appears that Russia and China’s intimate knowledge of Albion’s perfidy has prepared them for the naughtiness of Tony Blair and Bush’s shoot to kill policy and spiv Dave with his army of 70,000 moderates all made up with large square false beards and mascara.

    Let them enjoy their padded cells for a while to remember the bloodshed they have released on the Muslims for 30 years.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ giyane July 31, 2017 at 23:19
      Make you right, there, mate.
      The only law the US and Brits (and many others) respect is the ‘Law of the Jungle’.
      Admittedly, they may be immoral, but they sure as hell are diabolical! (And will pay, Inshallah, though as a Christian I would phrase it as ‘God willing’, or better ‘Thy will be done’.)

      • Rose

        Or in no faith-based words at all – what goes round, comes round – or as gran used to say: serves you right.

  • Paul Barbara

    Here is a letter to the Telegraph (I don’t know if they printed it):

    ‘Letters Editor by e-mail: [email protected]
    DAILY TELEGRAPH [141 words]
    111 Buckingham Palace Road
    LONDON SW1W 0DT For exclusive publication in the Telegraph

    Dear Sir
    Crime of Aggression

    The High Court judgment on Monday that Crimes of Aggression, such as that by Blair and Bush against Iraq, are not justiciable in English Courts because Parliament has not acted to make it so, is an insult to those in Germany whose forebears we executed for this very crime in 1946, when the Nuremberg Tribunal judge called this “the supreme crime of all” i.e. starting an aggressive war. It is of course a matter of dispute whether Germany started WW2, as Gerard Menuhin points out in his book ‘Tell the Truth and Shame the Devil’.
    But at a time when we are deploring the deaths of over half a million soldiers in a badly run campaign and for no gain, it is surely time to call a halt to war except when it is clearly in self-defence, as the UN Charter lays down.

    Yours sincerely

    [signed]

    Dr James B Thring ‘

  • J Arther Rank

    I thought it had been obvious for some time that Blair had protection.
    Not only protection but reward for services.
    A more honest character would hide in shame,but this failure only adds to the contempt in which he will be held for the rest of his life.

  • Temporarily Sane

    So-called “international law” provides excuses to wage illegal war on “enemies” of the West (the list of foes du jour is generated and updated by the indispensable folk in Washington, DC) and to haul select dictators and alleged miscreant from poor countries to the Hague to show the world the West’s commitment to hauling select dictators and alleged miscreants from poor countries to the Hague.

    NATO countries and those deemed by DC to be “friendly” or “allies” can slaughter, repress, invade etc. with impunity. For example, Israel and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are not subject to invasion or sanctions or any other form of overt and covert warfare despite their atrocious practices.

    This is hardly a new development.

  • Steve Holden

    Strangely enough, the USA similarly seeks to nullify or ignore international law as well. Surely no accident. These countries high-mindedly pronounce on what is right and wrong, yet are clearly not interested in being subjected to the same standards they would apply to others. Ther reason? Money. It would be so, so hard for the arms industry, for example, to do without Saudi Arabian weapons purchases. Sigh.

  • Andrew Nichols

    Victors justice. Always has been. If the Germans had won they’d have said the same at the war crimes trials they’d have set up.

  • giyane

    I wish the English language was fit for purpose. Mr Scaramucci is the latest victim of its deficiency in conveying the precise truth, having fallen into the trap like myself of using obscene metaphor to express himself. The fact that Craig as a senior civil servant was totally unaware of a glaring error in UK law, deliberately crafted by the UK government, so that it could retain one meaning while leaving the entire population of the world with a totally different meaning, is almost incredible.

    Furthermore, I think that this deliberate deception goes a long way to mitigate the responsibility that hired minions such as Tony Blair or Jeremy Corbyn carry for their mistakes.. Comprehension of the full extent of UK governmental deception is reserved for the political class, whether they belong to the working class like Phillip Hammond or Jack Straw and have mastered the art of double-speak, or the middle class like Theresa May or Tony Blair who therefore speak it fluently, or the Toff class like David Cameron, who can simultaneously translate from plain speech to plain deceit and vice versa without batting an eyelid.

    In fact the subject of Craig’s last post, Dr Who, who Craig reminded us was an alien, and not English, as epitomised by the slightly diverging eyesight of the excellent Tom Baker, able to think in alien morality as well as our normal UK moral and mental framework, has a lot in common with this post. Craig protested against the impenetrable membrane wall of silence surrounding state evil such as torture and extraordinary rendition, bombing of civilians, and the threat of nuclear war. It was always others that were doing these unspeakable things, not us.

    Sometimes the only way to convey truth in the English language is by coarse metaphor. It’s the only thing powerful enough to cross the placenta. Craig introduces us brilliantly in my opinion to the awful truth, that our rulers rule both us and the rest of the world by establishing a legal framework from which they themselves are completely exempt. What arseholes! And the toxic gas from their orifices is spreading from areas of government to every level of work-place management. I lost my job today for speaking non-PC-speak. i.e. I was speaking truth to power and power replied by a blast of corporate methane. Such is life.

      • Ba'al Zevul

        What did you say? Perhaps the era of the speakeasy has returned – let us establish clandestine locations where the like-minded can privily and pungently discuss their PC oppressors (while smoking indoors, drinking to excess, gorging on hamburgers and enforcing a no-women rule)?

        This is the place for you, Giyane…

        http://is-a-cunt.com/category/tony-blair/

        • giyane

          Ba’al

          You always were hung up about Blair. Let’s face it green slime is not the nastiest thing about aliens. Political correctness is not the nastiest thing about the Blair era. It was just a device by which one could continue to operate capitalism, red in blood and claw, with enough green slime of PC to convince the rest of the world of their altruistic heart. Theresa May has adopted the Blair Brown green slime as indeed Blair adopted the Thatcher Heath green slime before.

          Question is, can the presence of green slime i.e. bull shit be used as evidence of having committed a crime ( like Grenfell corporate manslaughter ) or state aggression, in a court of law?

          • Ba'al Zevul

            Get it out of your system, Giyane, that’s fine. However, there’s plenty more inspiration on that site. I linked to the twelve successive major cuntings of Blair (who embodies pretty well everything we both despise, and for me serves as a surrogate for the corrupt politics of our time) for no other reason than that that is the topic of the blog post. PC warning – ISAC is likely to offend your tender sensibilities too.

            The answer to your question is no. You can’t prosecute a metaphor. The charge of aggression was certainly worth a try, but it was legally questionable. That is the way the law works here, and loopholes often exist. The courts don’t make the laws, and that is up to the politicians. Who, as a shed full of very noisy turkeys, will not vote for Christmas.

            Hence we need to be either subtler or more bloodily violent. A citizen’s arrest – not a touchy-feely Monbiot one, but a real one – for misconduct in public office might be the peaceful way to go. And it’s about time our legislators took a long hard look at what should and what should not qualify as a charity,

  • fwl

    Remember when a certain Rump Parliament set up a unique one off High Court for the specific purpose of trying the former Head of State.

  • Aubrey

    No wonder why the humanity is going down! We don’t have the law and if we have we don’t use it. It is just someone’s profit and interest!

  • Riaaz Tayb

    Well there are monist and dualist international legal systems. Monist (like Bolivia) means that an international treaty becomes law upon signing without the Legislature making it law by passing an act doing so. Dualist means that international treaties are signed, then the legislature incorporates it into law. So there is nothing unusual about this.
    Fact is, they relied upon this, to exclude the crime of aggression. And these crimes of aggression have been part of customary international law since Nuremburg (if not before). In addition, there is the jurisdiction of the UN, and its prohibition on aggression – which codified customary international laws on international aggression.
    There could have been numerous alternative verdicts on this matter, but the UK wants to be like the US where it is presidential prerogative to declare war (even though the constitution keeps that firmly in Congress’ mandate only).
    After David Kelly, the smeering of Corbyn, this should be no surprise.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Riaaz Tayb August 1, 2017 at 08:50
      Hmmn. Who controls the UN? Olde saying, ‘who pays the piper calls the tune’.Doesn’t matter if it is paid by fiat ‘thin air’ Federal Reserve ‘Effectivos’.

  • Dave

    An independent State cannot be bound by international law and remain independent. And international law can only be enforced by the powerful, so if a weak state is bound by international law only, then they are bound by might is right and de facto there is no international law.

    Therefore instead of the wishful thinking that Blair can be prosecuted under international law, which would require the British Parliament agreeing to the trial, it would be legally easier (but still practically impossible) to prosecute him under national law in UK under the terms of the 2000 anti-terrorism act.

    This Act’s definition of terrorism is the same as war, which is violence to promote a political agenda. That is Blair can be prosecuted under his own anti-terrorism act, which in true Marxist double-speak fashion was enacted to make some more equal before the law than others. I.e. the Government decides whose a terrorist and who gets prosecuted.

    • Michael McNulty

      And using another Blair law which removed double jeopardy we can prosecute him again if we fail to convict him the first time. How ironic that would be.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Dave August 1, 2017 at 09:40
      Luckily, God does not need the ‘British Parliament’ to OK his judgement, which though somewhat delayed, will be brought about, as sure as God made little apples (and Bliar knows it, or should do). Pity he didn’t stick to guitar playing.

  • Peter Beswick

    When Blair was made a Special Representative to the ME Quartet “Peace Envoy”, it was not immediately apparent what his skill set he would bring to the table.

    It was of course to make bloody sure that peace didn’t break out any time soon by deploying his special gift of lying. He lied to both (all) sides but tailored the lie to individual audiences. Result: Trust in tatters – status quo solid.

    But today brings news (not in the British media) of the reason Israel and Palestine must never be allowed to make peace.

    China! China is the reason. One Belt, One Road.

    Israeli press give a surprisingly balanced view;

    https://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/diplomacy-defense/151819-170801-china-unveils-four-point-plan-to-resolve-israeli-palestinian-conflict

    However the Washington Post betrays the lie;

    “China views both Israel and the Palestinians as “important partners” in its “One Belt, One Road” initiative, a mammoth Chinese-funded push to develop transport routes including ports, railways and roads to expand trade in a vast arc of countries across Asia, Africa and Europe, the ambassador said. China has also proposed launching a “China-Palestine-Israel tripartite dialogue mechanism in order to coordinate the implementation of major assistance programs in Palestine,” he said.”

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/china-urges-support-for-new-israel-palestinian-peace-plan/2017/07/31/778b0236-763d-11e7-8c17-533c52b2f014_story.html

    In a nutshell;

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative

    Once the petrodollar is replaced, once Russia and China puts an end to US economics being based on war, once China retarmacs the Silk road……………… The People (not the politicians) of Israel and Palestine will realise they have no reason to fight each other. In fact before the US is dismantled the people of Israel and Palestine will learn their conflict is based on lies. As all recent US and UK wars have been.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Peter Beswick August 1, 2017 at 09:56
      Unfortunately, you are discounting the ‘Prince of this world’, who has different ideas, and the power to enable them.
      Would that you were right.

  • Olivia Agate

    Puts into plain English what we nuclear weapons protestors are frequently told in lowly magistrates courts.

  • Pardeep Singh

    The ruling confirms what we all already know, that the west and its leaders can do whatever it wants, where ever it wants with complete impunity.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Pardeep Singh August 1, 2017 at 20:10
      Exactemente, as it has always been. Law of the jungle.
      But the cycle will end, with the Day of Judgement. Woe is the lot of the transgressors.

1 2 3

Comments are closed.