Secrets and sleaze

It was scandalous that Tony Blair was able to suborn his pliable attorney general Lord Goldsmith in December 2006 to put pressure on the SFO to do his dirty work.

It was even more of a scandal that not a single member of his Cabinet was prepared to speak out and, if necessary, to resign in protest at this blatantly political interference in judicial proceedings, making them all equally culpable.

Fortunately, campaigners Corner House and the Campaign Against Arms Trade were more principled and determined to ensure that this stinking can of worms was brought to public attention.

The bizarre new Labour line was that British lives could be in jeopardy on British streets if the inquiry continued. Specifically, SFO assistant director Helen Garlick quoted the Foreign Office as briefing her that, "if this caused another 7/7, how could we say that our investigation, which, at this stage, might or might not result in a successful prosecution, was more important."

Neither she nor her anonymous Foreign Office mandarin explained how one decision might lead to the other.

If her statement means anything, it implies that the Saudi dictatorship - or possibly even the BAE directors - might react to a continuation of the inquiry by initiating terrorist attacks on public transport in London or other British cities.

If that is the honest Foreign Office assessment of the House of Saud, why on earth is this government pressing ahead with selling them weapons of mass destruction?

The reality is that no-one believed that investigating corrupt dealings related to arms sales contracts posed a danger to British citizens or, as serial liar Tony Blair maintained, to national security.

It did, however, pose a threat to the super-profits envisaged by BAE, when Saudi Prince Bandar told Britain that, if the SFO investigated his family's Swiss bank accounts, the deal was off.

The High Court judges have called correctly in describing this shabby affair as a "successful attempt by a foreign government to pervert the course of justice in the United Kingdom."

This judgement exposes the government as politically and financially corrupt and it demolishes entirely its efforts to claim the moral high ground in international affairs.

And it ought to put paid to its efforts to institutionalise sleaze by means of the Constitutional Renewal Bill, which, if carried into law, would allow the Attorney General to use the magical "national security" trump card to halt criminal investigations and prosecutions without recourse to either Parliament or judiciary.

New Labour has dropped its initial pledges on openness, honesty and freedom of information. It has degenerated to a level of squalor, secretiveness and sleaze similar to that witnessed and condemned during the latter years of the John Major premiership.

While essential, reopening the SFO inquiry cannot be the only necessary step.

It is also vital to change the state's priorities from military to peaceful, which means supporting civilian production rather than throwing cash at the merchants of death and cuddling up to the repressive regimes that dominate their customer base.