This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/7264887.stm

The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Iraq minutes 'should be released' Iraq minutes 'should be released'
(40 minutes later)
The government has been told to release the minutes of two cabinet meetings in the days before the Iraq war.The government has been told to release the minutes of two cabinet meetings in the days before the Iraq war.
The demand came from Information Commissioner Richard Thomas after a Freedom of Information request was rejected by the Cabinet Office.The demand came from Information Commissioner Richard Thomas after a Freedom of Information request was rejected by the Cabinet Office.
He said disclosure would "allow the public to more fully understand this particular decision of the cabinet".He said disclosure would "allow the public to more fully understand this particular decision of the cabinet".
The order refers to meetings on 7 and 17 March, 2003. The Cabinet Office can appeal against the decision.The order refers to meetings on 7 and 17 March, 2003. The Cabinet Office can appeal against the decision.
In his ruling, Mr Thomas says the minutes had to be released to help "transparency and public understanding of the relevant issues".In his ruling, Mr Thomas says the minutes had to be released to help "transparency and public understanding of the relevant issues".
'Public impression'
He also says that accountabilty for the decisions made is "paramount".He also says that accountabilty for the decisions made is "paramount".
The person making the request said that not releasing the information created "a public impression that something not entirely truthful has been uttered".The person making the request said that not releasing the information created "a public impression that something not entirely truthful has been uttered".
But the Cabinet Office refused to release minutes on the grounds that the papers were exempt from disclosure as they related to the formulation of government policy and ministerial communications.But the Cabinet Office refused to release minutes on the grounds that the papers were exempt from disclosure as they related to the formulation of government policy and ministerial communications.
However, Mr Thomas ruled that, in this particular case, the public interest in disclosing the minutes outweighed the public interest in withholding the information.However, Mr Thomas ruled that, in this particular case, the public interest in disclosing the minutes outweighed the public interest in withholding the information.
He said he did not believe that disclosure would "necessarily" set a precedent in respect of other cabinet minutes.He said he did not believe that disclosure would "necessarily" set a precedent in respect of other cabinet minutes.
Mr Thomas accepted that a number of specific references in the minutes could damage Britain's international relations if they became public and could be "redacted" - blacked out - before the minutes are released.
Second resolution
The ruling is set to reopen controversy over the then attorney general Lord Goldsmith's legal advice on the war.
On the eve of war, 17 March, his opinion unequivically saying military action was legal was presented to cabinet, MPs and the military and published.
However, after long-running reports that he had changed his mind into the lead up to war, his initial lengthy advice given to Tony Blair on 7 March was leaked and then published in 2005.
This advice raised a number of questions and concerns about the possible legality of military action against Iraq without a second UN resolution and was never shown to the cabinet.
The then prime minister Tony Blair defended his decision not to show the cabinet the full advice, saying that Lord Goldsmith had attended the cabinet in person and was able to answer any legal questions and explain his view.