That's going to sound like a good defence echoing round the Old Bailey.

I haven't got a clue what you are talking about

Do you ?

Yes, I do.

Any commander of a British warship that opens fire on a Spanish police boat may well find himself in the dock of the Old Bailey on a charge of murder.

The fact that the Spanish police have acted in a similar fashion in the past will be no defence.

The Old Bailey is reputedly echo-ey.

Feel free to ask for any more clarification.

When acting on instructions from the UK Government ?

The UK Government will never issue such instructions.

I think Cameron's holiday in Spain has put out a very reassuring message on that point.

The hot-heads of Gibraltar must be biting their carpets in rage.

Precisely.

Nothing at all to do with the Old Bailey.

Not Precisely.

The UK Government is subject to the Rule of Law.

http://www.fiep.org/member-forces/sp...guardia-civil/

The GC is an armed institution of a military nature partly controlled by the Ministry of Defence.

Now tell me again that if they were caught firing on unarmed civilians in Gibraltar waters or partaking in other aggressive illegal actions, that the RN would have no right to take whatever action was necessary to stop them.

No !

I will never tell you that if the Spanish police "were caught firing on unarmed civilians in Gibraltar waters or partaking in other aggressive illegal actions, that the RN would have no right to take whatever action was necessary to stop them."

That is because you are deliberately mixing together "firing on unarmed civilians", and "partaking in other aggressive illegal actions", and you are deliberately using the phrase "right to take whatever action was necessary to stop them" for opening fire in both.

Dick it's not worth the pain

Spot-on

exactly what is that

It is the notion that everyone in Britain is subject to the laws of the land including the rulers.

In the case of the Government, every single minister is personally responsible for the decisions he or she makes whilst in office.

Tony Blair went to Attorney-General to find out if the actions he was about to take in Iraq were legal, for example.

but if he gets it wrong doesn't pay any penalty - so where is the responsibility ??


nope, he was just trying to pass the buck to someone who really didn't want to give him an answer.
and you think the eventual decision made was legal ??

But this is all for another time, another place and is totally off thread

In the case of Blair, he gets it wrong, proceeds with an illegal war, gets blood by the bucketload on his hands, and becomes "Peace Envoy to the Middle East" !