"I would not say that the SFO and the Judiciary had "no axe to grind."
The SFO have had more than enough time to put up or shut up, and have done neither.
For our own interests (and not in order to placate the Saudis) we should choose to waste no more money on this flawed process.
1) No evidence has been produced (and what anecdotal evidence there is suggests that there is no case to answer).
2) This all happened 20 years ago. And it threatens UK jobs today.
3) There is NO EVIDENCE that BAE did anything wrong, and yet people like you are still harping on and on about corruption, tarnishing the company's reputation and damaging the UK and its interests."
Jacko, I'll repeat it for you because I don't think that you are listening to my point - if you are then you have chosen to ignore it. You are arguing about the innocence or otherwise of BAE. Personally, as I have stated before, this is not the issue here for me. The issue is fundamental to the way our country is currently governed. Of course the High Court has made it clear (and you can make the letters as big as you like - I do get the point!) that as yet BAE have not been proven to do anything wrong. I have no problem with BAE and if they are innocent well thats great. The issue is that TB under pressure from a large corporation and a foreign power decided to interfere materially in an independant investigation. Period.
For you to suggest that the SFO are guilty of anything more than doing their job is a an unnecessary slur on the professionalism of the people in that organisation who are clearly unable to fight back. However, it is ok for you with a bit of a chat with some mates in BAE to completely clear them of all charges. How do you know that they did nothing wrong? - where is your evidence for this assertion? Again though we are off-piste - the independance of the police, investigating authorities and the judiciary are continually questioned and erroded by this govt and people of your ilk are just encouraging the thin end of the wedge. This is a completely black and white issue - independance of the investigation as opposed to your constitutional solution that allows the govt to veto inquiries that they don't like. Sounds a lot like Russia and Zimbabwe to me.
What have I said that tarnishes the reputation of the company? I have accused them of nothing. As for damaging the interests of my country, well I have been there and done it not just talked about it like you - put my @rse on the line in a BAE product on quite a few occasions without complaint. But thanks for being patronising and insulting. However, if you think that people interested in the separation of powers from the executive and the due process of law in Britain is some kind of traitor then you are clueless about the issue at stake here. You don't have to be a hippy to be concerned about the control freakery of this govt This govt rides rough over the rights of ordinary citizens, spends billions on surveillance (CCTV), demands ID cards etc etc in the name of protecting us from terrorists. How many die each year from terrorist attacks in the UK? Average 5-10 over the last 5years? How many die in car accidents - 3500?, curable cancers etc - perhaps I am the only one who thinks that we have our priorities wrong.
How is the process flawed? The SFO decide that there is a case for an investigation, they investigate until it is clear that there is no case to answer or they have evidence for a prosecution. Period. If this were a murder investigation would you be saying that the police have had more than enough time to put up or shut up? I am confused about the flaws in this process? If this were another corporation accused of say, insider trading, wouldn't you want it to go through the same process or do you really want the Prime Minister to have a veto? If that is what people really want in our democracy then we really are in trouble.