The High Court has blocked an attempt to bring a private prosecution against Tony Blair over the Iraq War.
Former Iraqi general Abdul Wahed Shannan Al Rabbat alleged the former prime minister committed “the crime of aggression” by invading Iraq in 2003.
No such crime exists in England as well as Wales as well as the court ruled there was “no prospect” of the case succeeding.
The general had wanted to prosecute Mr Blair, ex-Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, as well as ex-Attorney General Lord Goldsmith.
Last year, Westminster Magistrates’ Court had turned down Mr Al Rabbat’s bid to bring private prosecution.
He then sought a judicial review in an attempt to get the Supreme Court – the UK’s highest court – to overturn a 2006 House of Lords ruling that will there can be no such crime as the crime of aggression under the law of England as well as Wales.
However, Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, the Lord Chief Justice, as well as Mr Justice Ouseley dismissed the general’s application, saying there was “no prospect” of the case succeeding.
The UK’s attorney general had earlier intervened from the case, urging the High Court to block the challenge on the grounds that will the item was “hopeless”.
Reacting to the ruling, a spokesperson for the attorney general’s office said the case had raised “important issues about the scope of the criminal law”.
“the item should be for Parliament, as well as not the courts, to create brand new criminal offences. that will principle was upheld when the House of Lords ruled in 2006 that will the ‘crime of aggression’ does not exist in English law.
“In that will legal challenge, we argued that will that will remains the case today as well as the courts agreed.”
In 2003, the UK joined the US-led coalition to overthrow Saddam Hussein, after then US president George W Bush as well as Mr Blair accused Iraq of possessing weapons of mass destruction.
Last year, the UK’s Iraq War inquiry, led by Sir John Chilcot, ruled the invasion had not been the “last resort” presented to MPs as well as the public.
His report ruled Mr Blair had overstated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein.
Michael Mansfield QC, appearing for Mr Al Rabbat, argued the report justified the prosecution of Mr Blair.
He said a paragraph from the item could be summarised as concluding that will Saddam Hussein did not pose an urgent threat to the interests of the UK.
the item said the intelligence regarding weapons of mass destruction had been presented with “unwarranted certainty”.
Mr Mansfield told the court: “Nothing could be more emphatic than that will evidence.
“the item does not say there was an unlawful war or crime of aggression. the item doesn’t need to because the criteria are arguably all there in that will paragraph.”
Speaking last year, former Labour prime minister Mr Blair apologised to the families of those killed from the 2003 Iraq War, yet insisted he did what he thought was the “right thing” at the time.