Difference between revisions of "Document:Wilmshurst Resignation Letter"
m (1 revision: Downing Street memo files from Sandbox) |
(Upgrade to use DocProv) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | == | + | {{DocProv |
| − | + | |DateYear=2002 | |
| − | + | |DateMonth=3 | |
| − | Elizabeth Wilmshurst was deputy legal adviser to the Foreign Office. As this letter shows, she resigned because she did not believe the war with Iraq was legal. Her letter was released by the Foreign Office to the BBC News website under the Freedom of Information Act. | + | |DateDay=18 |
| − | + | |DocType=A letter | |
| − | == | + | |Author=Elizabeth Wilmshurst |
| + | |Recipient=[[Michael Wood]] (The Legal Adviser), the Private Secretary, the Private Secretary to the Permanent Under-Secretary, Alan Charlton (Director Personnel) and Andrew Patrick (Press Office) | ||
| + | |Source=[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4377605.stm BBC Website] | ||
| + | |Note=Elizabeth Wilmshurst was deputy legal adviser to the Foreign Office. As this letter shows, she resigned because she did not believe the war with Iraq was legal. Her letter was released by the Foreign Office to the BBC News website under the Freedom of Information Act. | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | ==Wilmshurst Resignation Letter== | ||
1. I regret that I cannot agree that it is lawful to use force against Iraq without a second Security Council resolution to revive the authorisation given in SCR 678. I do not need to set out my reasoning; you are aware of it. | 1. I regret that I cannot agree that it is lawful to use force against Iraq without a second Security Council resolution to revive the authorisation given in SCR 678. I do not need to set out my reasoning; you are aware of it. | ||
Revision as of 07:02, 22 November 2013
★ Start a Discussion about this document
Wilmshurst Resignation Letter
1. I regret that I cannot agree that it is lawful to use force against Iraq without a second Security Council resolution to revive the authorisation given in SCR 678. I do not need to set out my reasoning; you are aware of it.
[The following italicised section was removed by the Foreign Office but later obtained by Channel 4 News]
My views accord with the advice that has been given consistently in this office before and after the adoption of UN security council resolution 1441 and with what the attorney general gave us to understand was his view prior to his letter of 7 March. (The view expressed in that letter has of course changed again into what is now the official line.)
I cannot in conscience go along with advice - within the Office or to the public or Parliament - which asserts the legitimacy of military action without such a resolution, particularly since an unlawful use of force on such a scale amounts to the crime of aggression; nor can I agree with such action in circumstances which are so detrimental to the international order and the rule of law.
2. I therefore need to leave the Office: my views on the legitimacy of the action in Iraq would not make it possible for me to continue my role as a Deputy Legal Adviser or my work more generally.
For example in the context of the International Criminal Court, negotiations on the crime of aggression begin again this year.
I am therefore discussing with Alan Charlton whether I may take approved early retirement. In case that is not possible this letter should be taken as constituting notice of my resignation.
3. I joined the Office in 1974. It has been a privilege to work here. I leave with very great sadness.
