What is now known as the Shawcross principle was the subject of debate in the UK Parliament on 29 January 1951.[3] In a lengthy defence of his conduct regarding an illegal strike, Attorney GeneralHartley Shawcross cited hundreds of years of precedent as to the firm foundation of his actions.
The principle (or doctrine) states:
that the Attorney General[4][5][6] must take into account matters of public interest,
that assistance from cabinet colleagues must be limited to advice,
that responsibility for the decision is that of the Attorney General alone, and
that the government is not to put pressure on him or her.
The 1964 Rivard affair in Canada caused the sitting Attorney-General, Guy Favreau, to resign because of his non-prosecution of senior officials in the Pearson government over their attempted bribery of American officials in Rivard's case.[7]
The Shawcross principle was cited by Australian Attorney-General Bob Ellicott who cited attempts by his boss, Malcolm Fraser, to control his discretion.[7]
In 2004 in the context of the Tony Blair's invasion of Iraq, a whistleblower by the name of Katharine Gun risked prosecution under the Official Secrets Act. Lawyers for Gun, who was formerly a GCHQ translator, asked for disclosure of advice on the legality of the Iraq war given by Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith in his role as the government's legal adviser. Goldsmith said that he had conducted what is known as a "Shawcross exercise". Goldsmith sent a "Shawcross letter" to the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, who was responsible for GCHQ, advising him that HMG should decline to pursue Gun.[8]
