The High Court today [London, 24 April 2008] formally quashed the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) decision to drop its corruption investigation into arms deals between BAE Systems and Saudi Arabia. This follows the Court's ruling on 10 April that the SFO, acting on government advice, acted unlawfully in stopping its investigation in December 2006 following a threat from Saudi Arabia. The decision to quash was made by Lord Justice Moses and Mr Justice Sullivan, who also gave the SFO permission to appeal to the House of Lords against their ruling of 10 April. The Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) and The Corner House, recognising the public importance of the legal issues, did not oppose the SFO's application for permission to appeal.
The judges expressly thanked CAAT and The Corner House for bringing the judicial review of the SFO decision because important matters of public interest would not otherwise have seen the light of day, in particular, privileged access to 10 Downing Street and threats to an independent prosecutor. In granting the appeal, Lord Justice Moses said that this was
‘a paradigm case’ that concerns ‘the way this country [the UK] is governed and a basic constitutional principle’.
Mr Justice Sullivan pointed out that the SFO had not identified any grounds for challenging the judgment in law in seeking to appeal. Lord Justice Moses noted that the SFO decision to stop the BAE‐Saudi investigation will remain quashed, whatever the outcome of the appeal.
The judges ordered the SFO to pay the costs of the judicial review so far and, recognising the public service that CAAT and The Corner House are performing, also ordered the SFO to pay all the costs of the House of Lords appeal, regardless of the outcome. CAAT spokesperson Symon Hill said:
The High Court's quashing of the SFO decision has confirmed that neither BAE nor Saudi Arabia have the right to bully Britain. The Court today pointed out that the case had revealed vital issues about access to Downing Street. For the sake of British democracy, security and interest, arms companies' influence in the corridors of power must end. It is increasingly clear that the public will not be fooled by either weak assertions about national security or naive claims about jobs.
Sarah Sexton of The Corner House said:
We remain confident of the strength of our case in the House of Lords. The principle that no one is above the law is fundamental to justice, as the High Court has clearly stated. It is now essential that the government abandons its draft legislation to give the attorney‐general the power to cancel a criminal investigation or prosecution by claiming ‘national security’ with no meaningful parliamentary or judicial oversight.
The Corner House
Since its founding in 1997, The Corner House has aimed to support democratic and community movements for environmental and social justice. It is motivated by the concerns of such movements, whether they be locally‐based struggles for land or water rights or better health care; campaigns against destructive mining, dam or forestry projects; or struggles against racial discrimination. We aim to pay constant attention to issues of social, economic and political power and practical strategy. We try to take a ‘bottomup’ approach, filled with examples, to issues of global significance which are often handled in a more abstract way.
As part of our solidarity work, The Corner House carries out analyses, research and advocacy with the aim of linking issues, of stimulating informed discussion and strategic thought on critical environmental and social concerns, and of encouraging broad alliances to tackle them.
Editor's Note: Amongst the excellent resources via the Corner House website see particularly the following briefings: ‘Underwriting Bribery: Export Credit Agencies and Corruption’ by Dr Susan Hawley; ‘How Northern Donors Promote Corruption: Tales From the New Mozambique’ by Joseph Hanlon and ‘Who Owns the Knowledge Economy?
Political Organising Behind TRIPS’ by Peter Drahos with John Braithwaite. http://www.www.thecornerhouse.org.uk
Also see ‘The Arms Deal Scandal’ by Terry Crawford‐Browne, ROAPE, Vol.31 No.100, June 2004, pp.329–342.
To people in South Africa and millions around the world who supported the struggle against apartheid, it is incomprehensible that the ANC government's first major decision was to buy warships and warplanes when there is no conceivable foreign military threat and when the real threat to the consolidation of democracy is poverty. Instead of houses, schools and clinics being built, instead of money to tackle AIDS, South Africa bought submarines
ROAPE will have an update from Crawford‐Browne in the September 2008 issue.
The way to make money in the arms business is to sell weapons to both sides, and then to cause conflict between them. That, reputedly, was Sir Basil Zaharoff's philosophy a century ago. He was the godfather to BAE and the British arms industry, who instigated the arms race that culminated in Europe's First World War. Bribery of politicians was an inherent part of Zaharoff's modus operandi, and the 20th century became the bloodiest in history. The five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, the very governments ostensibly responsible for the maintenance of peace are, instead, the source of 90% of the world's proliferation of armaments. This diabolical trade in killing people for profit is estimated by Transparency International to account for about 45% of world corruption. Postapartheid South Africa became one of the first targets …