by RAY FLEMING
WE still don't know what advice the UK Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, gave to the Cabinet about the legality of the invasion of Iraq. We now know that the British government's most senior legal officer considers that the notorious Guantanamo Bay detention centre should be closed. He said in London that the existence of Guantanamo Bay remains unacceptable. The use of the word remains is interesting. Are we to understand that the British government has previously expressed this view? As far as we know, Mr Blair's opinion has not gone beyond thinking that the detention centre is an anomaly. If he has hardened his position, why has he not spoken about it himself rather than leaving the job to one of his ministers? Still, it is comforting to know that in a government which is ready to cut so many legal corners the Attorney General still defends the legal verities and is ready to point them out to the Bush administration. Describing Guantanamo Bay as a symbol of injustice to many, he said: The historic tradition of the United States as a beacon of freedom, liberty and of justice deserves the removal of this symbol. The immediate reaction from Washington to the AttorneyGeneral's speech was that the men held in Guantanamo are bad people who will attack the United States if they are freed. Perhaps so, but why are they not entitled to an open trial to establish their guilt? Are they to be held without trial indefinitely?
Iraq´s invasion
17/05/2013 00:00
Also in Holiday
- Spain wants Britons to show they have 113.40 euros, £97, per day for their holidays
- Over two hours for Britons to get through Palma airport queues
- Palma Airport passport control "collapse" put down to unscheduled flights
- Living in a motorhome in Palma: "It'll only get worse"
- Watch those prices in Mallorca
No comments
To be able to write a comment, you have to be registered and logged in
Currently there are no comments.