UK Wrong to Hault Saudi Arms Probe - Political Fever

Comrade Joe · #1 (**permalink**) 04-10-2008, 01:57 PM

I smell a cover up.

Quote:

The High Court has ruled that the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) acted unlawfully by dropping a corruption inquiry into a £43bn Saudi arms deal.

In a hard-hitting ruling, two High Court judges described the SFO's decision as an "outrage".

Defence firm BAE was accused of making illegal payments to Saudi officials to secure contracts, but the firm maintains that it acted lawfully.

The SFO said national security would have been undermined by the inquiry.

The legal challenge had been made by Corner House and the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT).

In handing down the decision on Thursday, one of the judges, Lord Justice Moses, told the High Court that the SFO and the government had given into "blatant threats" that Saudi co-operation in the fight against terror would end unless the probe into corruption was halted.

He added that the SFO had failed to assure them that everything had been done to meet the rule of law.

"No one, whether within this country or outside, is entitled to interfere with the course of our justice," he said.

"It is the failure of government and the defendant to bear that essential principle in mind that justifies the intervention of this court."

CAAT had argued that the SFO's decision to drop the probe was illegal under the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD's) Anti-Bribery Convention.

"We are delighted," said CAAT's Symon Hill after the decision.

Saudi Arabia is said to have threatened to cancel last year's Eurofighter order

"It has been clear from the start that the dropping of the investigation was about neither national security nor jobs. It was due to the influence of BAE and Saudi princes over the UK government."

The SFO's inquiry was into the al-Yamamah deal with Saudi Arabia, which was first signed in 1985 but ran into the 1990s.

Under the agreement, BAE sold Saudi Arabia Tornado and Hawk jets and other assorted weapons. The deal also included long-running maintenance and training contracts.

In December 2006, the then Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, announced that the SFO was suspending its inquiry.

Lord Goldsmith said its continuation would have caused "serious damage" to UK-Saudi relations and, in turn, threatened national security.

Saudi Arabia is also reported to have threatened to cancel last year's deal to buy 72 Eurofighter Typhoon jets from BAE Systems.

Worth an initial £4.4bn, contracts for maintenance and training are expected to take the final bill to £20bn.

BAE argued that the SFO probe could "jeopardise" both this deal and "seriously affect" relations with the Saudi kingdom.

Details of the alleged bribes to Saudi officials were revealed in June of last year in an investigation by the BBC's Panorama programme.

It said that up to £120m a year was sent by BAE Systems from the UK into two Saudi embassy accounts in Washington.

Panorama established that these accounts were actually a conduit to Saudi Prince Bandar for his role in securing the al-Yamamah deal, something he has strongly denied.

The OECD said last month that it was launching its own investigation into the decision to drop the SFO inquiry.

The judges in London did not rule that the case would be reopened, but have said they would listen to further arguments.

BBC NEWS | Business | UK wrong to halt Saudi arms probe

diuretic · #2 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 05:16 AM

Good for the judges. Jeez Tony effing Blair eh?

Comrade Joe · #3 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diuretic

Good for the judges. Jeez Tony effing Blair eh?

Quite typical, the man who wanted to bring "democracy" to the middle east is happy to bribe dictators and then let them subsequently dictate to us.

diuretic · #4 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 07:42 AM

And to think I used to go to school in the very same place he launched both his campaigns. I am beyond disgusted.

Comrade Joe · #5 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 07:45 AM

AlFor someone who talked about being "whiter than white", he has been as corrupt as any PM and that includes Thatcher. It would be a struggle to find anyone in the country who isn't disgusted with him.

diuretic · #6 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 08:31 AM

I'm glad he's gone, Third Way indeed. But is Labour recovering or is it still on its Blairite path? Sorry if this is a thread drift, just ignore my query if it's going off track. I just have to express my disgust with him. It goes very deep for many reasons.

Comrade Joe · #7 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diuretic

I'm glad he's gone, Third Way indeed. But is Labour recovering or is it still on its Blairite path? Sorry if this is a thread drift, just ignore my query if it's going off track. I just have to express my disgust with him. It goes very deep for many reasons.

In my eyes it is following the same path under Brown, the only noticeable differences being that he is cutting back on the privatising of health and education. Blair's acadamies and foundation hospitals are not being pushed through to the extent expected. Other than that i think George Galloway was right when he said they are two cheeks of the same backside

diuretic · #8 (**permalink**) 04-11-2008, 09:15 AM

Galloway has a way with words. Grumpy bastard but on point.

The last time I was in the UK (September 1982) was in the wake of Thatcher's khaki election and I remember taking a pic (with a camera that had film in it) of the banner over at the GLC (from Westminster Bridge) where Ken L had the unemployment figures up.

Ah but I'm reminiscing too much.

Sod frigging Blair.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

User Name		Remember Me?
Password