UK attorney general 'has questions' on legality of Israel's actions in Iran
The UK government's top legal adviser has raised questions over whether Israel's actions in Iran are lawful, according to a source familiar with discussions inside the government.
The source suggested to Sky News that Attorney General Richard Hermer's thinking, which has not been published, complicates the UK's potential involvement in the Iran-Israel conflict.
If the attorney general deems Israel's actions in Iran to be unlawful then the UK is restricted in its ability to help to defend Israel or support the United States in any planned attacks on Iran.
Speaking on condition of anonymity, the source said that the attorney general's concerns limit UK involvement in the conflict "unless our personnel are targeted".
US President Donald Trump is currently weighing up his options for Iran and has repeatedly suggested the US could get involved militarily.
This would likely involve the use of US B-2 bombers to drop bunker-busting bombs to destroy Iran's nuclear facility built deep into the side of a mountain at Fordow.
These B-2 bombers could be flown from the UK base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, strategically close to Iran.
The US could also choose to fly them the far greater distance from the US mainland.
Under a long-standing convention, the UK grants permission to the US for the base to be used for military operations.
The US military could also request the use of the UK military base in Cyprus, for refuelling planes.
Any refusal by the British could complicate US military action and, diplomatically, put pressure on the trans-Atlantic relationship.
Israel's justification
Israel has justified its war by claiming that Iran poses an "imminent" and "existential" threat to Israel.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has cited his country's own undisclosed intelligence claiming Iran was on the brink of obtaining a nuclear weapon.
The Israeli government also claimed, without publishing evidence, that Iran was planning an imminent attack on Israel.
They also cited the recent International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report which concluded that Iran had been "less than satisfactory" in "a number of respects" on its international compliance over its nuclear activities.
It is not clear what aspect of Israel's justification for military action the attorney general has concerns over.
The Attorney General's Office has told Sky News: "By long-standing convention, reflected in the ministerial code, whether the law officers have been asked to provide legal advice and the content of any advice is not routinely disclosed.
"The convention provides the fullest guarantee that government business will be conducted at all times in light of thorough and candid legal advice."
The UK armed forces have previously rallied to help defend Israel from Iranian missile and drone strikes when the two sides engaged in direct confrontation last year.
34:31
In April 2024, RAF typhoon jets shot down drones fired from Iran.
The UK military was also involved in efforts to defend Israel from a ballistic missile attack in October 2024.
But the UK has not been involved in the current conflict, which began when Israel targeted Iranian nuclear facilities and scientists as well as more definitive military targets such as missile launchers and commanders.
The UN's nuclear watchdog has previously raised concerns about any attack against nuclear facilities because of the inherent danger but also the legality.
A number of resolutions passed by the IAEA's general conference has said "any armed attack on and threat against nuclear facilities devoted to peaceful purposes constitutes a violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter, international law and the Statute of the Agency".
Israel believes that Iran's nuclear programme has a military use, which makes it a legitimate target.
It believes the regime is aimed to enrich uranium to develop nuclear weapons.
Tehran, however, has always insisted its nuclear programme is for civilian use.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has also condemned Israel's use of armed force against Iran as a violation of the United Nations (UN) Charter and international law.
Interpretations of International Law
Different countries adopt varying interpretations on the use of force in response to future attacks.
The first legal position is that nations can act preventatively to deflect threats.
The second is that they can act to deflect future armed attacks that are imminent.
The third is that states can only act to deflect attacks that have occurred.
That third position is generally considered to be too restrictive and the first as too broad.
The grey area lies with the second position, and it rests with the definition of "imminent".
The concepts of "proportionality", "necessity" and "imminence" are key considerations.
International law scholars have told Sky News that Israel may pass the "proportionality" test in its actions against Iran because its targets appear to have been military and nuclear.
But whether there was the "necessity" to attack Iran at this point is more questionable.
The attorney general would likely be considering the key legal test of the 'imminence' of the Iranian threat against Israel - and whether it is reasonable to conclude that an attack from Iran was "imminent" - as he weighs the legal advice issued to UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.
There is always nuance with legal advice, judgements rest on a variety of factors and advice can evolve.
In the run up to the 2003 Gulf War, the US and UK justified their action by arguing that Saddam Hussein possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction - a claim that turned out to be wrong.
The then-attorney general's advice, which evolved, was central to Tony Blair's decision to join President Bush in attacking Iraq.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
John Major urges misconduct crackdown, warning of falling political standards
Former prime minister Sir John Major has lambasted politicians for increasingly breaking rules they should follow and putting 'political interest before public virtue', as he warned of slipping standards in public life. Sir John led the Conservative government between 1990 and 1997, which was mired in accusations of 'sleaze' following a series of parliamentary scandals. In response, he set out the Nolan Principles, a code of conduct which all politicians and officials must abide by, and the Committee on Standards in Public Life to advise the prime minister on ethical standards. A majority of those in public life still follow the principles, he said, but the minority who do not should face consequences. 'Too often, there are none,' Sir John said, speaking at the Institute for Government think tank's one-day conference to mark the 30th anniversary of the Nolan Principles. Pointing to the Partygate scandal which rocked Boris Johnson's government, as well as scandals facing the police, the Church of England, and public services such as the Post Office, Sir John warned of slipping public standards, and insisted 'a re-set is essential'. He added: 'Today, scepticism does not fairly describe the public mood: a more accurate description would be a mixture of cynicism and disillusion that stretches across most of our public institutions ‒ the Church, Parliament, police, public service and press among them. That is not healthy in our public life. 'The Committee on Standards in Public Life has reported that social and political trends have coarsened standards. That is true, but put too gently. 'Standards have been undermined by being ignored, by being broken, by public figures who put personal or political interest before public virtue.' Many of the watchdogs put in place to prevent abuses of power are unable enforce their edicts, Sir John suggested. 'It has been our past practice to offer guidance on good conduct – and trust it will be delivered. That was the Nolan approach. 'But experience has taught us that no rules can deal with individuals prepared to ignore them and, sometimes, sanctions are required,' he said. He welcomed moves to bolster oversight of ministers with an independent adviser on ministerial standards, and the parliamentary commissioner for standards to oversee MPs. But Sir John said the Advisory Committee on Public Appointments (Acoba) stood in 'stark contrast'. The watchdog, which gives politicians, their advisers and chief civil servants advice on whether or not jobs they take up after leaving public life are appropriate, should be 'put on a statutory basis, and given deterrent powers', he said. He also called for a thinning of the number of special advisers who act on behalf of ministers, and warned that House of Lords appointments in recent years had not passed the 'smell test'. 'There should be no free pass to becoming a legislator,' Sir John said, saying the upper chamber should not contain legislators unable or unwilling to take part in scrutinising law changes. The former prime minister also suggested reports American businessman Elon Musk had planned to give a multimillion-pound donation to Nigel Farage's Reform UK political party would have left it a 'wholly-owned subsidiary of foreign money', as he criticised the dangers of political donations. 'We need to refresh protections, and close off this pipeline before it becomes a serious political problem,' he added. Sir John closed his speech by warning that Britain's 'widely envied reputation for being free of corruption and bad practice' was at risk. He added: 'I regret the slow erosion of that reputation – which we would once have thought indestructible. It is time for us to reverse this trend before the damage becomes beyond salvage.'
The Independent
11 minutes ago
- The Independent
Welfare reform legislation to be debated next month, MPs told
Proposed legislation to reform the welfare system will be debated by MPs for the first time next month, Commons Leader Lucy Powell has announced. MPs are also expected to vote on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill on July 1, when it receives its second reading in the Commons. The Government has faced backlash from some Labour MPs over the 'damaging disability benefit cuts', which it has said could save up to £5 billion a year. Ms Powell set the date for the Bill's second reading during business questions on Thursday. Labour MP Neil Duncan-Jordan has accused the Government of 'rushing through' the Bill, adding: 'This isn't something I'm prepared to support.' Ministers are likely to face a Commons stand-off with backbenchers over their plans, with dozens of Labour MPs last month saying the proposals were 'impossible to support'. The reforms – aimed at encouraging more people off sickness benefits and into work – are set to include the tightening of criteria for personal independence payment (Pip), which is the main disability benefit, as well as a cut to the sickness-related element of universal credit (UC) and delayed access to only those aged 22 and over. Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said the legislation 'marks the moment we take the road of compassion, opportunity and dignity'. She added: 'Our social security system is at a crossroads. Unless we reform it, more people will be denied opportunities, and it may not be there for those who need it.' In what could be seen as an attempt to head off some opposition, the legislation will give existing claimants a 13-week period of financial support. The Department for Work and Pensions said this will apply to those affected by changes to the Pip daily living component, including those who lose their eligibility to Carers Allowance and the carer's element of UC. But campaigners, including disability equality charity Scope, said the longer transition period, up from an originally expected four weeks, 'will only temporarily delay a cut and disabled people will continue to be living with extra costs when it comes to an end'. As the Bill was formally introduced to the Commons on Wednesday, and the question was asked as to what the next date for debate will be, former Labour MP John McDonnell, who now sits as an independent for Hayes and Harlington, could be heard to say 'Never'. Mr Duncan-Jordan, MP for Poole, is one of the members who has urged ministers to withdraw the cuts, which he has argued will 'make things worse' for disabled people. Speaking to the PA news agency, he said: 'It's clear the Government are rushing through this change before MPs have received all the necessary impact assessments that they need to make a decision. 'The Bill lays out how large numbers of disabled people are going to be made poorer. This isn't something I'm prepared to support.' Earlier this week, Mr Duncan-Jordan had said: 'The Government will only withdraw its damaging disability benefit cuts if Labour MPs make clear they will vote against them. 'The so-called concessions that have been suggested are nowhere near enough to undo the damage that is being proposed. The facts are undeniable: these cuts won't create jobs, they'll only push three million people deeper into hardship.' The latest data, published on Tuesday, showed that more than 3.7 million people in England and Wales are claiming Pip, with teenagers and young adults making up a growing proportion. Pip is a benefit aimed at helping with extra living costs if someone has a long-term physical or mental health condition or disability and difficulty doing certain everyday tasks or getting around because of their condition. Data for Pip claimants begins in January 2019, when the number stood at 2.05 million. An impact assessment published alongside Wednesday's Bill introduction confirmed previously published estimates that changes to Pip entitlement rules could see about 800,000 people lose out, with an average loss of £4,500 per year. Ms Kendall previously said there are 1,000 new Pip awards every day – 'the equivalent of adding a city the size of Leicester every single year'. The impact assessment also confirmed a previous estimate that some 250,000 more people, including 50,000 children, are likely to fall into relative poverty after housing costs in 2029/2030, although the Government repeated that this does not take into account the potentially positive impact of £1 billion annual funding by then for measures to support people into work. Changes to UC are expected to see an estimated 2.25 million current recipients of the health element impacted, with an average loss of £500 per year. But the Government said around 3.9 million households not on the UC health element are expected to have an average annual gain of £265 from the increase in the standard UC allowance. While all of the Bill applies to England and Wales, only the UC changes apply to Scotland. The Government said there are equivalent provisions to legislate for Northern Ireland included in the Bill.
Daily Mirror
14 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer calls for Iran nuke talks as Trump ponders joining Israel strikes
"We need to de-escalate this," the PM said. "Yes the nuclear issue has to be dealt with, but it's better dealt with through negotiations than by way of conflict" Keir Starmer has called for Iran's nuclear programme to be dealt with through negotiations rather than conflict. Last night Donald Trump continued to weigh up whether to send America's military to help Israel strike Iran's military facilities. It following days of Israeli bombardment of Iran, and Tehran counterattacking with missile strikes on Israeli towns and cities. Speaking to broadcasters this morning, the Prime Minister said: "Obviously all of us, the UK included, are very concerned about the nuclear programme that Iran is developing, long been concerned about that. "We also completely recognise Israel's right to self defence. "But the principle is that we need to de-escalate this. There's a real risk of escalation here that will impact the region, possibly beyond the region, into Gaza and obviously It's already having an impact on the economy." Mr Starmer went on: "I've been absolutely clear about this - yes the nuclear issue has to be dealt with, but it's better dealt with through negotiations than by way of conflict." When he took office in 2018, Donald Trump pulled the US off the nuclear treaty with Iran which had prevented the state working towards a nuclear since 2015 when it was signed. Britain has continued to urge de-escalation, but has deployed two refuelling tankers and 14 Typhoon jets to Cyprus to protect British personnel and interests in the Middle East. The Foreign Office has evacuated family members of British Embassy staff from Israel but not advised UK nationals to leave the country. Asked if Mr Starmer would prefer Mr Trump to go down the route of diplomacy rather than military action, a No 10 spokesman said: "The Prime Minister has been clear that his priority is de-escalation." The spokesman added: "Clearly de-escalation is the priority, and we would not want to see anything that ramps up the situation. "That is our priority. We have been clear on that for a number of days now. De-escalation remains this Government's priority." Asked if the UK would block the US from using the Diego Garcia base to launch a strike against Iran, the spokesman said: "I'm not going to get into hypothetical situations and I'm not going to speculate on future operations, but we continue to liaise with international partners as the Prime Minister has done for a number of days now and will continue to do so." An Iranian missile hit the main hospital in southern Israel early Thursday, wounding people and causing "extensive damage" but no serious injuries, the medical facility said. Israeli media aired footage of blown-out windows and heavy black smoke. Get Donald Trump updates straight to your WhatsApp! As tension between the White House and Europe heats up, the Mirror has launched its very own US Politics WhatsApp community where you'll get all the latest news from across the pond. We'll send you the latest breaking updates and exclusives all directly to your phone. Users must download or already have WhatsApp on their phones to join in. All you have to do to join is click on this link, select 'Join Chat' and you're in! We may also send you stories from other titles across the Reach group. We will also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose Exit group. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Other missiles hit a high-rise apartment building in Tel Aviv and other sites in central Israel. At least 40 people were wounded, according to Israel's Magen David Adom rescue service. Israel, meanwhile, carried out strikes on Iran's Arak heavy water reactor, its latest attack on Iran's sprawling nuclear program. Iranian state television said there was "no radiation danger whatsoever" and that the facility had been evacuated before the attack. The seventh day of conflict came a day after Iran's supreme leader rejected U.S. calls for surrender and warned that any military involvement by the Americans would cause "irreparable damage to them."
