*Ø* Legality of Iraq occupation 'flawed'

From The Independent:

"The senior Foreign Office lawyer who resigned after ministers ignored her advice that the war in Iraq was illegal has issued a damning legal critique of the occupation, claiming that the alleged abuse of prisoners 'could amount to war crimes'.

"In her first newspaper interview since her resignation, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, the former deputy legal adviser to the Foreign Office, said that the basis for going to war should always be based on 'facts' rather than an 'assertion' about an 'imminent threat'. Ms Wilmshurst said 'it could be alleged that the use of force in Iraq was aggression' while 'the kinds of abusive treatment of Iraqi prisoners that have been alleged could amount to war crimes'.

"Her comments came as Sir Jeremy Greenstock, Britain's former envoy to Iraq, made the clearest admission yet that intelligence that Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons was wrong. He said: 'We were wrong on the stockpiles, we were right about the intention.'

"Ms Wilmshurst expressed concern about the size of the US civilian presence in Iraq. She also said she was worried about the lack of legal protection for Iraqis if they were harmed by allied troops or civilian contractors, including private security guards. She said it was 'worrying' that the occupying powers had given immunity to US and British civilians which was 'very, very wide' and 'not what you would expect'. They would be protected from prosecution even if they seriously injured Iraqi women and children.

"She said the Bush administration's 'war on terror' was legal 'nonsense' -- conferring no more powers on the US to detain prisoners than 'the war against obesity' -- and President Bush's policy of pre-emptive self-defence was illegal under international law." [emphasis mine - N]

Continue here