Court rules that prime minister Somchai Wongsawat's ruling People Power party be disbanded after it is found guilty of voting fraud

The political crisis that has paralysed Thailand and stranded as many as 300,000 international travellers took a dramatic turn today when a court disbanded the ruling party and banned the prime minister from office.

Judges from the constitutional court found the People Power party (PPP) and two senior coalition partners guilty of electoral fraud for vote-buying in last December's general election and barred the prime minister, Somchai Wongsawat, from office for five years.

But hopes that an altered political landscape might satisfy the anti-government protesters and bring a swift end to the week-long blockade at Bangkok's two airports were dimmed when the ruling coalition's six parties signalled their intent to reform under a new banner.

The ruling also raised the spectre of street violence after government supporters angered by the judges' widely expected decision surrounded the Bangkok court and refused to allow the judiciary leave the building.

Overnight, a grenade was thrown from a flyover near Bangkok's barricaded domestic Don Muang terminal, killing one person and injuring 22 other sleeping protesters.

Analysts portrayed the situation on the ground as extremely volatile, while others said the judges' decision made with uncharacteristic haste was tantamount to a covert coup through which a royalist-military elite sought to strip the elected government of power.

"Thailand is in the middle of a crisis," said Sunai Thasuk of Human Rights Watch, who was at the courthouse. "The government supporters are very, very upset. The climate is very volatile and both sides have been known to use violence against each other. It's a highly dangerous situation."

Britons caught by the shutdown of Bangkok's Suvarnabhumi international airport a week ago told of their fears over the political turmoil, and mounting frustrations over their inability to find a way to leave the country.

But one glimmer of hope came as the international airport today reopened to cargo flights, reducing the economic impact of lost export earnings, estimated to be £53m daily.

Demonstrators for the anti-democratic People's Alliance for Democracy, who invaded Suvarnabhumi and Don Muang to demand the government quit and Somchai step down, were overjoyed when they heard the verdict.

"My heart is happy, said Pailin Jampapong, 41, choking back tears of joy among the throng at Suvarnabhumi. "My friends are very happy."

Immediately after the decision to disband the PPP, Machima Thipatai and Chart Thai parties, Somchai said he would abide by the rule of law and stand aside, describing it as "not a problem. I was not working for myself. Now I will be a full-time citizen."

But the ruling that bans Somchai and 36 party executives and MPs does not prevent the PPP rump reforming. They immediately signalled they would move to the new party of Puea Thai (For Thailand) - a measure not barred by the constitution.

The former minister Jakrapob Penkair, a close confidante of the ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, said the court's decision came as no surprise. "Our members are determined to move on and we will form a government again out of the majority that we believe we still have," he said.

But Giles Ungpakorn, a political scientist at Bangkok's Chulalongkorn University, accused the "fascist Pad", judges and the monarchist-military elite in the capital of staging "judicial coup" to rob the rural poor government supporters of their rights.

"The majority of Thai population, who are poor, face a double whammy," he said. "First, the elite Royalists are doing everything possible to take away their basic democratic rights. Secondly, mass job losses are occurring among workers in the tourist industry as a result of the airport blockade. The Pad protesters are middle-class extremist who don't have to go to work."

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Bin Laden's 'right-hand man' to be put back in jail rather than be sent to Jordan after breaching bail conditions

Thailand's prime minister, Somchai Wongsawat, is set to step down today with the rest of his government after a constitutional court banned him from office and found his party and two others guilty of electoral fraud.

The verdict caused celebrations at Thailand's two main airports, which have been occupied for almost a week by the People's Alliance for Democracy (Pad) – a conservative anti-government protest group.

The government spokesman Nattawut Sai-kau said the prime minister and his ruling, six-party coalition would step down.
"We will abide by the law. The coalition parties will meet together to plan for its next move soon," he said.

Pad members at Bangkok's international airport cheered and hugged as they heard news of the verdict.

Somchai's People's Power party, the Machima Thipatai party and the Chart Thai party were found guilty of committing fraud in the December 2007 elections that brought the coalition to power.

The court's president, Chat Chalavorn, said he was dissolving the parties "to set a political standard and an example".

"Dishonest political parties undermine Thailand's democratic system," he said in the court's ruling.

Pro-government supporters at the court dismissed the verdict as a "judicial coup".

The ruling sends Somchai and dozens of party executives into political exile, barring them from the country's politics for five years.

But other members of the three parties that escaped the ban can join other parties, form a new coalition and choose a new prime minister. It is expected that Somchai will remain the caretaker prime minister until then.

Pad maintains that Somchai is a puppet of his brother-in-law, the ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra. Alarmed by rural support for Thaksin's populist policies it wants an appointed parliament, dominated by bureaucrats and the military.

Thousands of members of the protest alliance have been at the main Suvarnabhumi international airport and the domestic Don Muang airport for almost a week. Earlier today, an anti-government protester was killed at Don Muang when a grenade was thrown.

The protests have stranded more than 300,000 and brought the Thailand's lucrative tourism industry to a standstill.

At the Suvarnabhumi airport, the verdict was read out on a protest stage outside the main terminal.

"It is good because the [corrupt] politicians have been told to get out. It is good for Thailand. This is a blow for corruption," said Nong Sugrawut, a 55-year-old businessman who was among the thousands camped at Suvarnabhumi.

Politicians banned by the verdict refused to comment.

"The court just banned me and my party from political activity so I can't give you any comment," said Kuthep Saikrajang, a People's Power party spokesman.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

State governors today will press their case for federal help when they meet Barack Obama, the US president-elect, one day after official confirmation that the American economy is in recession.

Governors from the 50 states are seeking at least $40bn (£27bn) to help pay for healthcare for the poor and disabled, and $176bn for infrastructure projects such as road and bridge repair.

"We're going to be talking about what the elements of an economic stimulus plan will be," Deval Patrick, the governor of Massachusetts and a Democrat with close ties to Obama, said.

States have suffered big cuts in tax revenues, forcing 43 of the 50 states into budget deficits. Since virtually every state is legally obliged to balance its budget, governors have had to cut services, lay off workers and consider tax increases. Such moves only make the economic situation more difficult, the governors say.

"Without federal help ... what we will have to do is just make continuing cuts and/or raise taxes, both of which would have a further deleterious effect on our states' economy. We simply need help," Ed Rendell, the chairman of the national governors association, a Pennsylvania Democrat, told reporters. "When the economy is bad, the social service net demands grow."

The meeting in Philadelphia comes as Obama and Democrats controlling Congress are drawing up economic recovery legislation that could cost $500bn. The measure is virtually certain to contain help for states struggling with slumping revenues and difficult budget cuts as the recession deepens.

Nancy Pelosi, the speaker in the House of Representatives, said Democrats would work to have the economic stimulus measure ready for Obama's signature as soon as he takes office on January 20. It is expected to contain funding for infrastructure projects and aid to pay for healthcare for the poor with tax cuts, a temporary increase in food stamp payments, as well as investments in renewable energy projects and other "green jobs" initiatives.

The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) yesterday said that the US economy entered recession in December last year. The confirmation sent Wall Street plunging yesterday.

The Dow Jones industrial average fell 679.95 points, a drop of 7.7%, to end at 8,149.09, ending the index's five-day rise.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Condoleeza Rice's call for the Pakistani government to control its intelligence agency

India today downplayed the possibility of military action in response to the Mumbai attacks but demanded that Islamabad hand over suspected terrorists believed to be in Pakistan.

"Nobody is talking of military action," India's foreign minister, Pranab Mukherjee, told reporters when asked what action might be taken.

Indian investigators have said the attacks that killed at least 172 people last week were carried out by militants from Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Kashmiri extremist group based in Pakistan.

Mukherjee said a list of about 20 names was given to Pakistan's high commissioner to India at a meeting last night. India has already demanded that Pakistan take "strong action" against those responsible for the attacks, and the US has put pressure on Islamabad to cooperate.

Condoleezza Rice yesterday called for full Pakistani cooperation with the investigation into the Mumbai attacks, saying they represented a "critical moment" in the new civilian government's efforts to stamp its authority on Pakistan's security services.

The outgoing secretary of state said she did not want to "jump to conclusions", but made it clear during a visit to London that she expected Islamabad would have to answer for the attacks.

Rice, who is due to arrive in India tomorrow, urged its government to focus on the investigation of the attacks, and to avoid actions that might have "unintended consequences", such as troop manoeuvres.

The Indian government has claimed the attackers trained in Pakistan.

Islamabad has denied any involvement, but has warned that it might have to transfer forces from its western tribal areas, where they are fighting Islamic extremist groups, to its eastern border with India if there were threatening moves by Indian troops.

The Indian authorities have been releasing parts of their case against Pakistan to the media. Yesterday Indian media reported intelligence sources as saying an email claiming responsibility for the attack had been traced to an internet address in Lahore.

There were signs yesterday that India was winning the diplomatic tussle. A western diplomatic source said India's claims that extremist elements in Pakistan were involved in the attack were being widely believed, and that Pakistan's warning that it would have to move troops away from the Afghan border was being interpreted as "a threat" to western interests.

Speaking to reporters in London yesterday, Rice directed most of her remarks to the newly elected government of President Asif Ali Zardari.

"President Zardari has said rightly that extremism in any form is a threat to Pakistan as well as India. So I fully expect the commitment of Pakistan to absolute transparency and wherever the leads go, to follow them up," Rice said.

The civilian government's control over Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency (ISI) came into question last week when the prime minister, Yousef Raza Gilani, announced he would dispatch the agency's new director general, Lieutenant General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, to India to discuss the attack, only for the offer to be withdrawn within hours. A more junior ISI representative was promised instead.

Most foreign observers believe at least some ISI officers still harbour sympathy for Islamic extremist groups and turn a blind eye to their terrorist activities.

Rice did not mention the ISI yesterday but made clear she believed the time had come for Pakistan's government to ensure different parts of its security apparatus were not pursuing separate agendas.

"Everyone knows that you don't have day one with a military government and day two with a civilian government," Rice said. "But this is a critical moment for Pakistan to bring all its institutions into a common strategy to defend Pakistan. And defending Pakistan means rooting out extremism, defending Pakistani interests means cooperating fully, defending Pakistani interests means investigating this so further attacks can be prevented."

Rice said she was flying to New Delhi tomorrow "to show solidarity" and offer help with the investigation and counter-terrorism measures. She would also be discouraging the escalation of the situation.

India's high commissioner in London said last night the attacks were "probably" aimed at derailing peace talks between India and Pakistan, which had been given a boost by the election of a new democratic government in Islamabad.

Shiv Shankar Mukherjee told Sky News that India had made no "aggressive moves" since the attack, but warned that the peace process between the two countries was "under pressure".

But he added that "over the last few months we've been having a terrorist attack virtually every month in India. And we've leaned over backwards and have gone the extra mile ... to see that the dialogue succeeds, because there is no alternative, except peaceful dialogue to resolve our problems."

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

The Guardian's social affairs editor, John Carvel, and head of society, health and education, Patrick Butler, discuss the "damning" report into Haringey council's handling of the case of Baby P.

David Kennedy, the chief executive of the government's Climate Change Committee, discusses new proposals to reduce greenhouse gases by at least one fifth in just over a decade.

The Home Office civil servant alleged to have leaked documents that led police to arrest the Conservative politician Damian Green spoke publicly for the first time yesterday. Chief political correspondent Nicholas Watt looks at the latest developments.

Diplomatic editor, Julian Borger, discusses the pressure facing Pakistan to act against terrorists after last week's attack on Mumbai.

And art critic Jonathan Jones assesses the winner of the 2008 Turner prize, Mark Leckey.

George Bush, in a rare moment of reflection ahead of his departure from the White House, last night admitted that the decision to go to war against Saddam Hussein on the basis of flawed intelligence was the biggest regret of his presidency.

The acknowledgment marks the first time Bush has publicly expressed doubts about his rationale for going to war on Iraq. In the run-up to the war, the White House adopted a position of absolute certainty that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, basing its arguments on intelligence that has since been exposed as flimsy and wrong.

"The biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq," Bush told ABC television in an interview scheduled for broadcast last night. "I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess."

But he followed that moment of candour with an attempt to try to deflect charges that the White House misled Congress and the public to build a case for war, arguing that there had been widespread belief that Saddam had a nuclear arsenal.

"It wasn't just people in my administration; a lot of members in Congress, prior to my arrival in Washington DC, during the debate on Iraq, a lot of leaders of nations around the world were all looking at the same intelligence."

The exit interview found Bush in an unusually reflective mood for a president who has famously refused in the past to admit any mistakes.

He did not go so far as to say he would not have gone to war if the intelligence had been correct.

"That's an interesting question. That is a do-over that I can't do," Bush said, according to excerpts from the interview at presidential retreat Camp David.

Later on, he said: "I will leave the presidency with my head held high."

Despite the flawed basis for the invasion of Iraq, Bush defended his decision to leave US forces in the country.

He was not asked about allegations that political pressure was brought to bear on the CIA and other intelligence agencies in the run-up to the war.

Though Iraq remains among his defining legacies, Bush said he had not anticipated going to war when he was running for the White House.

"I think I was unprepared for war. In other words, I didn't campaign and say, 'Please vote for me, I'll be able to handle an attack'," Bush said. "I didn't anticipate war."

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Washington and several of its European allies were divided last night over how to respond to Georgia's and Ukraine's bids to join Nato and over whether to resume high-level Nato-Russia contacts frozen because of the Russian invasion of Georgia in August.

On the eve of a meeting of Nato foreign ministers today in Brussels, the Americans pushed for a new formula that would put Ukraine and Georgia on a slow path to Nato membership. But at least six European Nato members opposed the US move, which is backed by Britain, suggesting that the two-day Nato meeting will result in an ambiguous fudge.

Since 1999 prospective Nato members have had to follow a roadmap known as the Membership Action Plan (MAP) to qualify for membership. At a Nato summit in Bucharest in April President George Bush pressed for Ukraine and Georgia to be awarded the MAP, but he was defeated by Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany who argued that such a step would increase friction with Russia.

The summit agreed a contradictory compromise, denying the two countries the MAP while stating they would eventually become Nato members. The summit instructed today's meeting to review those decisions. With British and east European support, the Americans argued last night that the deadlock could be broken by pushing ahead on the membership path outside the MAP.
Germany, Spain, Italy and others disagreed, contending that there could be no Nato membership process without it.

"The whole discussion around the MAP has become so politicised that it has lost its sense. It has turned into something of enormous political symbolism," said a senior US official. "We should just try to put it aside."

The British have sought to bridge the divide by proposing that the MAP procedure remains valid, but that Georgia's and Ukraine's membership bids be processed through two separate commissions between Nato and the applicants.

The main European countries reject this. On balance they view Georgia as the bigger villain in the August war with Russia, regard Georgia's president Mikheil Saakashvili as untrustworthy, believe that political instability in Ukraine makes it unsuitable for Nato, and are anxious to avoid further confrontation with Moscow.

"There is no consensus," said a senior Ukrainian official. "The MAP will not be given to Ukraine. The issue has been removed from the agenda."
Rather than enhancing Nato security, both post-Soviet countries represent a security risk for the alliance, argues the west European camp.

Diplomats and analysts say that the transatlantic split is such that today's session will produce a formula that effectively replicates the conflicting signals sent in Bucharest. They add that the Bucharest decision was a mistake that contributed to the Caucasus crisis in August.

The issue of Nato membership for the two countries is intimately linked with western policy towards Russia, currently incoherent and contradictory.
President Nicolas Sarkozy of France earlier this month backed Russian calls for a major summit next year to try to redefine Europe's "security architecture." An international foreign ministers' meeting in Helsinki later this week could see Germany, France, Russia, and Finland supporting the summit, which is also opposed by the US and Britain.

"We have good European security institutions," said the senior US official. "The institutions that exist are sound. I am not convinced we need a new architecture."

A senior European diplomat said the Russian proposals could be considered but that the Americans had to be involved in any discussion about European security.

"The first thing the Russians need to do is explain what they have in mind."

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

As Mexican drug war intensifies, unofficial death toll approaches 5000, almost double 2007 figure

One anti-government protester was killed and 22 injured when a grenade was fired into Bangkok's domestic Don Muang airport, it was reported last night.

The attack came shortly after midnight local time, hours before before a ruling in an electoral fraud case which could deal a crippling blow to the government.

Thailand's Channel 7 television said that a grenade was fired from on a flyover near the airport, which, along with Suvarnabhumi international airport, has been occupied by the People's Alliance for Democracy (Pad) since last Thursday as part of the escalating campaign to topple the six-party ruling coalition.

According to the emergency services, 17 people caught in the blast were later discharged from hospital.

Pro-government protesters, who rallied for a second day in Bangkok, fear today's constitutional court ruling could be used by Thailand's royalist-military establishment as a back-door way to break the deadlock. The case had to be moved to another venue after hundreds of government supporters surrounded the court in the early hours of this morning.

The court, which has deliberated with uncharacteristic haste, will decide if the ruling People Power party or PPP and two coalition partners should be disbanded for electoral fraud, a move that would bar the prime minister, Somchai Wongsawat, from politics for five years.

But even this might not satisfy Pad's desire to force an election, as many PPP MPs could switch allegiance to a new "shell" party. The yellow-shirted demonstrators accuse Somchai of being a pawn for his brother-in-law, former premier Thaksin Shinawatra. Thaksin was ousted in a 2006 coup and is in exile. Somchai has refused to give in."I will not quit and I will not dissolve parliament," he said in the northern city of Chiang Mai yesterday.

Earlier yesterday, foreign airlines begun flying empty aircraft from Suvarnabhumi airport after authorities did a deal with protesters. For stranded passengers, including several thousand Britons, there was hope. The airlines said they intended to fly the planes to an airbase which has repatriated 30,000 travellers so far, and airports such as Phuket and Chiang Mai.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Response: The shipping industry has long asked governments for help in preventing attacks, says Simon Bennett

George Bush, in a moment of reflection ahead of his departure from the White House, last night admitted that the decision to go to war against Saddam Hussein on the basis of flawed intelligence was the biggest regret of his presidency. The acknowledgment marks the first time that Bush has publicly expressed doubts about his rationale for going to war on Iraq.

In the run-up to the war, the White House adopted a position of absolute certainty that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, basing its arguments on intelligence that was later exposed as flimsy and wrong.

"The biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq," Bush told ABC television in an interview scheduled for broadcast last night. "I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess." But he followed that moment of candour with an attempt to try to deflect charges that the White House misled Congress and the public to build a case for war, arguing that there had been widespread belief that Saddam had a nuclear arsenal.

"It wasn't just people in my administration; a lot of members in Congress, prior to my arrival in Washington DC, during the debate on Iraq, a lot of leaders of nations around the world, were all looking at the same intelligence."

He was not asked about allegations that political pressure was brought to bear on the CIA and other intelligence agencies in the run-up to the war.

The exit interview found Bush in an unusually reflective mood for a president who has famously refused in the past to admit any mistakes. He did not go so far as to say he would not have gone to war if the intelligence had been correct.

"That's an interesting question. That is a do-over that I can't do," Bush said, according to excerpts from the interview at Camp David. Later he said: "I will leave the presidency with my head held high."

Despite the flawed basis for the invasion of Iraq, Bush defended his decision to leave US forces in the country.

Though Iraq remains among his defining legacies, he said he had not anticipated going to war when he was running for the White House. "I was unprepared for war. In other words, I didn't campaign and say, 'Please vote for me, I'll be able to handle an attack'. I didn't anticipate war."

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

If the law were a colour, what would it be? Dominique Perrault, the Parisian architect of the newly reconstructed European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, thinks the answer is gold. Why gold? "Because this is not a criminal court," he says. "It's not a place concerned with prisons and punishments. It's do with relations between European countries, with constitutional concerns. And anyway, I thought the sky over Luxembourg is often so sad that it would be nice, somehow, to catch the sun and bring it here." He's right: when the low, late November sun catches the base of the court's brand new twin towers, they light up like a pair of giant candles.

The European Court of Justice, founded in 1952, is the highest court in the union, with a judge appointed from each member country. Located on top of the Kirchberg plateau, separated from Luxembourg City by a deep ravine, the court was until recently a rather soulless place. Perrault has succeeded in introducing an unexpected playfulness. "I like those cities you find in Spain, Austria or Bavaria," he says, "which have patches of wonderful and unexpected colour - where buildings have been designed to bring some nice architectural weather when conditions are grey."

The Kirchberg plateau forms a sort of latter-day bureaucratic Acropolis. Since the founding of the European Union, this place has been studded with a large number of imposing, if not exactly delightful, EU buildings. The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg was one of the six founding members of the European Community, and as the EU has expanded, the need for new architecture here has grown. Today, mighty institutions such as the European Investment Bank, housed in a purpose-built 1980s fortress designed by Denys Lasdun (the architect behind the National Theatre), stand next to a new generation of cultural buildings, among them the recently completed Philharmonie concert hall by French architect Christian de Portzamparc, and the new museum of modern art by IM Pei, the Chinese-American architect behind the glass pyramid at the Louvre. This all seems well done, although somewhat worthy and antiseptic.

As for the Court of Justice, this had to expand when it was announced that EU membership would increase to 27 countries. Perrault was commissioned to wrap a new building around the existing complex. His brief was not simply to enlarge the court, but to ensure that every one of its 2,000 staff, formerly spread across a huge campus, was housed under one roof. He and his collaborators have doubled the amount of space - and yet the building does not appear twice the size. It feels generous, easy to use, and well crafted - which, given that it cost you, me and everyone else in the EU more than €500m, is as it should be.

Behind those two pencil-thin gold towers lies a kind of shimmering palace. This is the grand new public plaza, between the towers and the main building, and its interiors are some of the most extraordinary yet created for the EU.

From the main entrance into the building, a ramp leads down to the central court. A dramatic room by any standards, this handsome timber-lined chamber boasts a ceiling straight out of One Thousand and One Nights. Above a great glass screen, a giant gold flower appears to blossom out over the judges' benches and the public viewing gallery. This is in fact a woven steel veil, which floats over the court like an improbably glamorous mosquito net over the bed of a fairytale princess. Well, that's what I saw, anyway. Perrault describes this ceiling as "like a shining Medusa". Perhaps the judges who meet here will make the final ruling on what it is meant to signify.

"I wanted to create a warm ambience," explains Perrault, "not a confrontational one. I wanted to grab the sun and bring it inside the court. The judges wanted some daylight, but not views out because this might distract them from their deliberations. So I thought of this golden veil, where the light can come in, [where it can be] warm even on a cold day. Then I made the floors and walls in warm wood, and the carpets in purple."

The smaller courtrooms, while less dramatic than the main chamber, are also timber-lined and warmly finished. These are encircled by a new two-storey corridor or internal street of crisp, modern spaces - lobbies, cafes, libraries, judges' chambers. Daylight filters through the building, while the artificial light is playful and imaginative.

The overall impression is of an earnest giant who, despite himself, wants to dress up and play. While Perrault has decked his building in colour and plays of shimmering light, the structure of the remodelled court is logical and perfectly serious. In a way, it reminds me of Barry and Pugin's Palace of Westminster: a mighty parliamentary building for what was once the hub of an empire, garbed in stunning fancy dress, and all the better for it.

Outside, the twin 100-metre-high towers are reminiscent of Oscar Niemeyer's National Congress Building in Brasilia. In cityscape terms, they have been designed with the same end in mind - as eyecatchers, architectural focal points to be seen from afar. Perrault's towers will be home to some 600 legal writers from across the EU, whose job it is to ensure that European laws are understood in more than 20 languages. That there are a lot of EU laws is evident in the sheer scale of the towers.

Dominique Perrault's Court of Justice is a highly unexpected one - though you could argue that we should expect nothing less. Born in Clermont-Ferrand and based in Paris since 1981, the architect made his name with the vast and hugely controversial Bibliothèque Nationale de France, one of President Mitterand's "grands travaux". Rising from what was an industrial wasteland in the 13th arrondissement on the south bank of the Seine, this giant library, known as "la TGB" (Très Grande Bibliothèque), is composed of four giant glass towers shaped in the guise of open books set about a plinth. Books are stacked in these towers, while readers gaze out into a sunken garden, planted with evergreen trees.

Stacking books in glass towers was, to many minds, an odd and even contrary thing to do. Soon after the building opened, wooden screens were placed inside the tower windows to keep the sun at bay. Exotic woods lining the reading rooms were a further source of controversy. Had they come from a sustainable source? What did their use say about a nominally post-imperial France? Despite these concerns, the building remains deeply impressive. Perrault has the knack of somehow combining the role and skills of an architect with those of an art director. His up-and-coming Mariinsky Theatre in St Petersburg, women's university in Seoul and San Pellegrino thermal baths near Bergamo all promise to be cinematic buildings of great daring and adventure. (The latter will look something like a fall oftumbled boulders, seen through a glacier at the foot of a real mountain.)

Perrault's designs can be wildly imaginative, and they can be abstractly minimal. He treads his own bold path. With the EU Court of Justice, he has shown us how a rational, highly organised and seemingly matter-of-fact building can be dazzling, even romantic. The law has never looked quite so colourful.

guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2008 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds