Chilcot report – what were the Iraq Inquiry’s findings and could Tony Blair’s immunity from prosecution be reviewed?
The full Iraq Inquiry comprises more than two million words - here we break down the main findings...
THE Chilcot report is the official report into the UK's role in the 2003 Iraq War and was published in 2016.
The full Iraq Inquiry comprises more than two million words and 12 volumes - but here we'll break down the main findings...
What is the Chilcot report?
The Iraq Inquiry was chaired by veteran civil servant Sir John Chilcot, who worked for decades at the highest level of government, so the report has been associated with his name.
It was published on July 6, 2016, and spanned almost a decade of UK government policy decisions between 2001 and 2009.
The report details the background to the decision to go to war in Iraq in 2003, whether troops were properly prepared, how the conflict was conducted and the aftermath.
Former prime minister Gordon Brown announced the inquiry would be carried in June 2009, but it was a further seven years before it was published.
The families of the 179 British service personnel and civilians killed in Iraq were given the lengthy document to read just two hours before it was made public.
The full report is 2.6million words long, spans 12 volumes and costs £787 to purchases - while an 150-page executive summary is available online or printed for £30.
What were the Iraq inquiry's findings?
- Military action was not a last resort and the UK chose to join the invasion of Iraq before all peaceful options for disarmament had been exhausted.
- There was no imminent threat from Saddam Hussein in March 2003 and intelligence had "not established beyond doubt" that he had continued to produce chemical weapons.
- Tony Blair assured US President George W Bush "I will be with you whatever," in a memo eight months before the war.
- A catastrophic failure to plan properly for both the war and keeping the peace after it, leading swiftly to pandemonium on southern Iraq's streets as well as serious equipment shortfalls for British troops - 179 of who were killed.
- Blair discarded repeated and major warnings inside government about how the invasion could hike the terrorist threat and about "the magnitude" of the task in rebuilding Iraq after Saddam's toppling.
- There were major intelligence failings by senior spies, headed up by Joint Intelligence Committee boss and later MI6 chief Sir John Scarlett, and their assessments should have been challenged.
- The decisions to proceed with military action from a legal perspective were "far from satisfactory" with the thinking behind Attorney General Lord Goldsmith's final green light for it "not clear".
- There was "little time" to prepare troops properly for deployment in Iraq and the risks were neither "properly identified" and resulted in "equipment shortfalls".
- UK forces faced gaps in some key capability areas including armoured tanks, reconnaissance and intelligence assets - and it's not clear who was responsible for identifying such issues.
Could Tony Blair's immunity from prosecution be reviewed?
Last year, a judge ruled that Tony Blair was immune from prosecution and said that if he were involved in a court case it could lead to the leaking of state secrets.
But lawyers for a former Iraqi general have asked the Lord Chief Justice to overturn that judgment and allow the prosecution of Mr Blair to proceed.
The Attorney General, acting for the Government, is trying to block the case on the grounds that aggression is not a crime in English law.
Lord Thomas – head of the judiciary in England – and Mr Justice Ouseley heard the case at the Royal Courts of Justice in London.
The private prosecution is being brought by Abdul Wahed Shannan Al Rabbat, the former chief of staff of the Iraqi army.
His lawyer is Michael Mansfield QC, the controversial barrister who has previously represented Mohamed al-Fayed, Michael Barrymore and the family of Stephen Lawrence.
The evidence for Mr Blair’s alleged crimes is based on the conclusion of the Chilcot report.
The prosecution also targets Jack Straw, who was Foreign Secretary at the time of the invasion, and former Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, who advised Mr Blair that the war was legal.
