Government and Military

16th November 1999

Tony Blair

Prime Minister

Dear Tony Blair,

Thank you for your acknowledgement, received yesterday, of our letter to you of the 31st August. We look forward to your reply. You will be aware of the ruling of Sheriff Gimblett in Greenock Sheriff Court on 21st October when she directed the jury to acquit on all charges the three members of Trident Ploughshares who damaged the barge Maytime in June this year. A copy of her ruling is enclosed for your reference and you will note her validation of the arguments made by us in our letter of 31st August. We would draw your attention in particular to the following section of her ruling:

"I listened carefully to Professor Boyle and have taken into account all the evidence in this case from him and the other experts and in the absence of any expert contradictory evidence from the crown, I have to conclude that the three accused in company with many others were justified in thinking that Great Britain in their use of Trident, not simply possession, the use and deployment of Trident allied with that use and deployment at times of great unrest, coupled with a first strike policy and in the absence of indication from any government official then or now that such use fell into any strict category suggested in the ICJ opinion .. the threat or use of Trident could be construed as a threat, has indeed been construed by others as a threat and as such is an infringement of international and customary law.

The three took the view that if Trident is illegal, given the horrendous nature of nuclear weapons, they had the obligation in terms of international law to do whatever little they could to stop the deployment and use of nuclear weapons in situations which could be construed as a threat.

It follows, if I consider that Angie Zelter, Ulla Roder and Ellen Moxley were justified in the first leg of their defence and having given that as the principle reason the crown has a duty to rebut that defence. They have not done so and so I uphold the three defence submissions in so far as they refer to malicious and wilful damage."

You will be further aware that The Lord Advocate of Scotland intends to refer the ruling to the High Court in Edinburgh for "legal clarification". We look forward to this hearing as a further opportunity for the issue of Trident’s lawfulness to be confronted.

We repeat our request for a meeting so that we can share with you as a matter of urgency our concern about the continued imminent threat from Trident and our conviction of its illegality under international humanitarian law. It is essential that this aspect of national policy is not treated in a clandestine and defensive manner but is open to debate and scrutiny. Such is the least implication of the Greenock judgement.

In the meantime, in view of the imminence of the threat mentioned above, we will continue our campaign of direct action. As part of that we will be again seeking ways to advise military personnel and civilians involved in the Trident system that they are engaging in unlawful activity and as such will be accountable to either the International Criminal Court or a special War Crimes Tribunal. It almost goes without saying that political leaders are principally accountable, as illustrated by the Pinochet case. As the Foreign Secretary has put it: "There will be no hiding place."

Now is the time to start talking.

Yours etc.

Enc; Gimblett Ruling

On behalf of Trident Ploughshares Core Group

Ian Thomson, Jane Tallents, Sylvia Boyes, Rachel Wenham, Marilyn Croser, Maggie Charnley, Kathryn Amos, Helen Harris, Morag Balfour, Joy Mitchell, David Mackenzie, Angie Zelter, Brian Quail

Printer friendly version

Home | Top