Seshmeister
07-13-2016, 10:32 AM
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14609441.How_Blair_may_face_both_criminal_and_civi l_actions/?ref=fbshr
How Blair may face both criminal and civil actions
http://www.heraldscotland.com/resources/images/5249047/?type=responsive-gallery
CRIMINAL charges could be brought against Tony Blair over the Iraq war after the damning verdict of the Chilcot report, according to legal experts.
The International Criminal Court have said that they have not ruled out a "war crimes" probe in relation to Blair.
Other lawyers have said there are arguments to take the matter to judicial review, which would provide an audit of the legality of the decision to invade Iraq, with a view to criminal charges.
Some have said Mr Blair’s behaviour could amount to the criminal offence of misconduct in public office and have also raised the question of the families taking out a private prosecution.
Lawyers acting for the families of some of the 179 British military personnel killed in the 2003 war are poring over the 2.6 million word report to formulate a civil law suit over allegations the former prime minister abused his power to wage war in Iraq.
Around 30 families of dead soldiers, have asked the law firm McCue & Partners to pursue a claim against Mr Blair. Others are expected to come on board.
The firm is looking at a civil case of misfeasance in public office.
Some legal experts believe families of Iraqis who died in the war could also join the action.
Rose Gentle, from Pollok, Glasgow, whose son Gordon was killed in Iraq, is part of the proposed civil action, but believes that Mr Blair should also face criminal proceedings.
She said: "I think he should be held responsible for what happened. I always wanted it to start, but because it was only to be lessons learned, we had to go with [Chilcot] first. The report gives us something to work on now."
Dr Shavana Musa, a lecturer in constitutional and international law at the University of Manchester believed Chilcot could pave the way for 'victims of families to proceed with criminal and/or civil legal action.
She says Blair could be tried in England and Wales over a charge of 'misconduct in public office', an ancient common law offence, created by judges, which can be traced back to the 13th century.
For the charge to be pursued a public official has to create an abuse of the public's trust in his office, without having a reasonable excuse or justification.
She said: "Under this offence, it could be argued that Blair wilfully misconducted himself amounting to an abuse of the public’s trust in him and did so without any reasonable excuse or justification. A defence for this could be that he received authorisation from the government, which was the 'reasonable excuse or justification' as per the offence.
"It could be said that evidence showing there was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein was deliberately 'skewed' in order to then ultimately go to war."
Sabah al-Mukhtar, an Iraqi-born lawyer. and president of the Arab Lawyers Association believes Chilcot evidence has uncovered a 'crime of aggression' as there was no threat to the UK to warrant the invasion and he believes criminal charges should be forthcoming.
"Had this happened anywhere else in the world, the people who had taken this decision, where the result of it is as damning as that, would have at least faced charges."
Herald Scotland:
He believed that while Chilcot said the legal basis for UK military action was “far from satisfactory,” and did not rule on its legality, a judicial inquiry could establish what charges could be brought.
"The remit of Chilcot was not to point fingers, not to accuse people, and not to treat people as suspects," he said. "A judicial inquiry would find what they have done is wrong."
Iain Scobbie, a University of Edinburgh law graduate, who has become a leading British expert in international law said there appear to be no routes to prosecute over 'crime of aggression' under Scots or English law.
The former First Minister Alex Samond had previously revealed he wanted Mr Blair to face an investigation by the International Criminal Court if the Chilcot inquiry finds that he made a commitment to US president George Bush to support the invasion.
It had been believed a door could be open for a criminal investigation with the ICC under the offence of "crime of aggression".
How Blair may face both criminal and civil actions
http://www.heraldscotland.com/resources/images/5249047/?type=responsive-gallery
CRIMINAL charges could be brought against Tony Blair over the Iraq war after the damning verdict of the Chilcot report, according to legal experts.
The International Criminal Court have said that they have not ruled out a "war crimes" probe in relation to Blair.
Other lawyers have said there are arguments to take the matter to judicial review, which would provide an audit of the legality of the decision to invade Iraq, with a view to criminal charges.
Some have said Mr Blair’s behaviour could amount to the criminal offence of misconduct in public office and have also raised the question of the families taking out a private prosecution.
Lawyers acting for the families of some of the 179 British military personnel killed in the 2003 war are poring over the 2.6 million word report to formulate a civil law suit over allegations the former prime minister abused his power to wage war in Iraq.
Around 30 families of dead soldiers, have asked the law firm McCue & Partners to pursue a claim against Mr Blair. Others are expected to come on board.
The firm is looking at a civil case of misfeasance in public office.
Some legal experts believe families of Iraqis who died in the war could also join the action.
Rose Gentle, from Pollok, Glasgow, whose son Gordon was killed in Iraq, is part of the proposed civil action, but believes that Mr Blair should also face criminal proceedings.
She said: "I think he should be held responsible for what happened. I always wanted it to start, but because it was only to be lessons learned, we had to go with [Chilcot] first. The report gives us something to work on now."
Dr Shavana Musa, a lecturer in constitutional and international law at the University of Manchester believed Chilcot could pave the way for 'victims of families to proceed with criminal and/or civil legal action.
She says Blair could be tried in England and Wales over a charge of 'misconduct in public office', an ancient common law offence, created by judges, which can be traced back to the 13th century.
For the charge to be pursued a public official has to create an abuse of the public's trust in his office, without having a reasonable excuse or justification.
She said: "Under this offence, it could be argued that Blair wilfully misconducted himself amounting to an abuse of the public’s trust in him and did so without any reasonable excuse or justification. A defence for this could be that he received authorisation from the government, which was the 'reasonable excuse or justification' as per the offence.
"It could be said that evidence showing there was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein was deliberately 'skewed' in order to then ultimately go to war."
Sabah al-Mukhtar, an Iraqi-born lawyer. and president of the Arab Lawyers Association believes Chilcot evidence has uncovered a 'crime of aggression' as there was no threat to the UK to warrant the invasion and he believes criminal charges should be forthcoming.
"Had this happened anywhere else in the world, the people who had taken this decision, where the result of it is as damning as that, would have at least faced charges."
Herald Scotland:
He believed that while Chilcot said the legal basis for UK military action was “far from satisfactory,” and did not rule on its legality, a judicial inquiry could establish what charges could be brought.
"The remit of Chilcot was not to point fingers, not to accuse people, and not to treat people as suspects," he said. "A judicial inquiry would find what they have done is wrong."
Iain Scobbie, a University of Edinburgh law graduate, who has become a leading British expert in international law said there appear to be no routes to prosecute over 'crime of aggression' under Scots or English law.
The former First Minister Alex Samond had previously revealed he wanted Mr Blair to face an investigation by the International Criminal Court if the Chilcot inquiry finds that he made a commitment to US president George Bush to support the invasion.
It had been believed a door could be open for a criminal investigation with the ICC under the offence of "crime of aggression".