| Iraq Inquiry | |
|---|---|
| Other names | Chilcot Inquiry |
| Participants | Sir John Chilcot, Sir Lawrence Freedman, Sir Martin Gilbert, Sir Roderic Lyne, Baroness Prashar |
| Location | London, England |
| Date | November 24, 2009 – February 2, 2011 |
The Iraq Inquiry, also referred to as the Chilcot Inquiry after its chairman, Sir John Chilcot,[1][2] is a British public inquiry into the United Kingdom's role in the Iraq War. The inquiry was announced on 15 June 2009 by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, with an initial announcement that proceedings would take place in private, a decision which was subsequently reversed after receiving criticism in the media and the House of Commons.[3][4][5]
The inquiry is currently being pursued by a committee of Privy Counsellors with broad terms of reference to consider the UK's involvement in Iraq from mid-2001 to July 2009. It will cover the run-up to the conflict, the subsequent military action and its aftermath with the purpose to establish the way decisions were made, to determine what happened and to identify lessons to ensure that in a similar situation in future, the UK government is equipped to respond in the most effective manner in the best interests of the country.[6] The open sessions of the inquiry commenced on 24 November 2009 and concluded on 2 February 2011.
Contents |
It was initially announced by Prime Minister Gordon Brown that the Iraq Inquiry would be held in camera, excluding the public and press. However, the decision was later deferred to Sir John Chilcot, the inquiry chairman, who said that it was "essential to hold as much of the proceedings of the inquiry as possible in public".[7][8] Brown was criticised by opposition politicians, who called the decision "a climb-down of massive proportions".[8] In July 2009, when the inquiry commenced, it was announced that the committee would be able to request any British document and call any British citizen to give evidence.[9] In the week before the inquiry began hearing witnesses, a series of documents including military reports were leaked to a newspaper which appeared to show poor post-war planning and lack of provisions.[10]
The committee of inquiry, the members of which were chosen by Gordon Brown,[11] comprises:[3][12]
The committee also takes secretarial support during proceedings from Margaret Aldred.[14]
The inquiry commenced in July 2009, with public hearings commencing on 24 November 2009 with Peter Ricketts, chairman of the Joint Intelligence Committee at the time of the invasion of Iraq, as the first witness. Opening the proceedings, Sir John Chilcot announced that the inquiry was not seeking to apportion blame, but to "get to the heart of what happened" but that it would not "shy away" from making criticism where it was justified.[15] The commission resumed its hearings in January 2011 with the former prime minister, Tony Blair, as its prime witness. The Independent on the 21st January 2011 published an article [16] with 15 charges that have yet to be answered by the inquiry.
On 29 October 2009, the UK Government published a Protocol in agreement with the Iraq Inquiry on the treatment of sensitive written and electronic information.[17] Evidence which will not be made available to the public includes anything likely to:
The inquiry will hear evidence from a variety of witnesses, such as politicians, including several cabinet ministers at the time of the invasion; senior civil servants, including lawyers and intelligence chiefs; diplomats, mostly composed of British ambassadors to Iraq and the United States; and high-ranking military officers including former Chiefs of the General Staff and Chiefs of the Defence Staff as well as senior operational commanders.[15]
The inquiry heard mostly from civil servants, intelligence and security officials, diplomats and military officers from the first public hearings up until it recessed for Christmas. Key witnesses included Sir Christopher Meyer, former ambassador to the United States who gave evidence on 26 November; Admiral Lord Boyce, former Chief of the Defence Staff; Sir John Scarlett, Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service; Major-General Tim Cross, the most senior British officer on the ground in the aftermath of the invasion; and Air Chief Marshall Sir Brian Burridge, overall commander of British forces in the invasion.
Ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair was publicly questioned by the enquiry on the 29th of January 2010, and again on the 21st of January 2011.[18] On both of these occasions protests took place outside the conference centre.[19] Because of widespread public interest in Blair’s evidence, public access to the hearings had to be allocated by lottery.[20] Special dispensations to attend where allocated to those whose close family where casualties of the war, some of whom shouted angry accusations at Blair during his second appearance.[19]
From the inquiry's resumption in January 2010, it has been hearing predominantly from politicians and former government officials, including Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair's director of communications.
Gordon Brown had to retract his claim that spending on defense rose every year during the Iraq war, as this was found not to have been the case.[21]
After a recess to avoid influencing the general election, the inquiry resumed public hearings on 29 June 2010. The first witness was Douglas Brand, chief police adviser to the Iraqi Interior Ministry from 2003-2005.[22]
The final witness in the public hearings, heard on 2 February 2011, was Jack Straw, Foreign Secretary from 2001-2006.[23]
The timing and nature of the inquiry generated a certain political controversy as it would not report back until after the general election.[8] Conservative Party leader David Cameron, dismissed the inquiry as "an establishment stitch-up", and the Liberal Democrats threatened a boycott.[24] In a Parliamentary debate over the establishment of the inquiry, MPs from all the major parties criticised the government’s selection of its members.[25] MPs drew attention to the absence of anyone with first hand military expertise, the absence of members with acknowledged or proven inquisitorial skills, and the absence of any elected representatives. Gilbert’s appointment to the enquiry was criticised on the basis that he had once compared Bush and Blair to Roosevelt and Churchill.[13] Several MPs drew attention to the fact that Chilcot would be unable to receive evidence under oath.
The criticism by the Liberal Democrats continued with the start of public hearings, with party leader Nick Clegg accusing the government of "suffocating" the inquiry, referring to the power given to government departments to veto sections of the final report. Meanwhile, a group of anti-war protestors staged a demonstration outside the conference centre.[26][27] Concerns were also raised about the expertise of the panel, particularly with regard to issues of legality by senior judges.[28] On 22 November 2009, former British Ambassador Oliver Miles published an article in the Independent on Sunday,[29] in which he questioned the appointment to the inquiry panel of two British historians on the basis of their Jewish background and previous support for Israel.[30] In a diplomatic cable from the US embassy in London, released as part of Cablegate, Jon Day, director general for security policy at the British Ministry of Defence is cited having promised the US to have "put measures in place to protect your interests" regarding the inquiry.[31] This has been interpreted as an indication that the inquiry is restricted "to minimize embarrassment for the United States.".[32][33]
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||